我们是否过度使用腹部计算机断层扫描来治疗急诊急性腹痛的年轻患者?

S. Salerno, M. Terranova, M. Anzelmo, A. Vinci, F. Vernuccio, G. Collura, M. Marrale, G. Re
{"title":"我们是否过度使用腹部计算机断层扫描来治疗急诊急性腹痛的年轻患者?","authors":"S. Salerno, M. Terranova, M. Anzelmo, A. Vinci, F. Vernuccio, G. Collura, M. Marrale, G. Re","doi":"10.5114/pjr.2022.115126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose The primary objective was to assess the frequency of appropriateness of computed tomography (CT) for acute abdominal pain (AAP) in the emergency department; the secondary aim was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of ultra-sound (US) and CT in the diagnosis of the aetiology of AAP for diseases that can be diagnosed by US; and the third objective was to assess extent to which inappropriate CT examinations for AAP result in ionizing radiation exposure. Material and methods In this retrospective single-centre study, we included patients aged between 15 and 46 years referred to the emergency department for AAP in 2016 and submitted to abdominal CT scans, collecting a total of 586 patients. In 152 patients with the more frequent pathologies, we compared the referral reason and current guidelines of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) IGUIDE®. Then we measured and compared the sensitivity of US and CT for the identification of the aetiology of AAP for diseases whose diagnosis can be reached by US. We also recorded the mean computed tomography dose index (CTDIvol), dose length product (DLP) and its standard deviation, and we calculated the effective dose (ED) using CT-Expo® software. Results According to IGUIDE and based on the clinical suspicion of CT requests, CT examination was considered crucial in 264 (45.05%) patients. 322 patients had a referral reason for CT scan that could be considered “possibly appropriate” according Iguide criteria (4, 5, 6 scoring). Of these, 135 had an inappropriate CT request according to image findings. Conclusions A better clinical framing and a correct interpretation of the reference guidelines could reduce unjustified exposure to ionizing radiation.","PeriodicalId":94174,"journal":{"name":"Polish journal of radiology","volume":"87 1","pages":"e187 - e193"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are we overusing abdominal computed tomography scans in young patients referred in an emergency for acute abdominal pain?\",\"authors\":\"S. Salerno, M. Terranova, M. Anzelmo, A. Vinci, F. Vernuccio, G. Collura, M. Marrale, G. Re\",\"doi\":\"10.5114/pjr.2022.115126\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose The primary objective was to assess the frequency of appropriateness of computed tomography (CT) for acute abdominal pain (AAP) in the emergency department; the secondary aim was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of ultra-sound (US) and CT in the diagnosis of the aetiology of AAP for diseases that can be diagnosed by US; and the third objective was to assess extent to which inappropriate CT examinations for AAP result in ionizing radiation exposure. Material and methods In this retrospective single-centre study, we included patients aged between 15 and 46 years referred to the emergency department for AAP in 2016 and submitted to abdominal CT scans, collecting a total of 586 patients. In 152 patients with the more frequent pathologies, we compared the referral reason and current guidelines of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) IGUIDE®. Then we measured and compared the sensitivity of US and CT for the identification of the aetiology of AAP for diseases whose diagnosis can be reached by US. We also recorded the mean computed tomography dose index (CTDIvol), dose length product (DLP) and its standard deviation, and we calculated the effective dose (ED) using CT-Expo® software. Results According to IGUIDE and based on the clinical suspicion of CT requests, CT examination was considered crucial in 264 (45.05%) patients. 322 patients had a referral reason for CT scan that could be considered “possibly appropriate” according Iguide criteria (4, 5, 6 scoring). Of these, 135 had an inappropriate CT request according to image findings. Conclusions A better clinical framing and a correct interpretation of the reference guidelines could reduce unjustified exposure to ionizing radiation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":94174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Polish journal of radiology\",\"volume\":\"87 1\",\"pages\":\"e187 - e193\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Polish journal of radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"0\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr.2022.115126\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish journal of radiology","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr.2022.115126","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

主要目的是评估急诊科急性腹痛(AAP)的计算机断层扫描(CT)的适当频率;次要目的是比较超声(US)和CT对超声可诊断的AAP病因的诊断准确性;第三个目的是评估不适当的AAP CT检查在多大程度上导致电离辐射暴露。在这项回顾性单中心研究中,我们纳入了2016年因AAP就诊于急诊科并进行腹部CT扫描的年龄在15至46岁之间的患者,共收集了586例患者。在152例更常见的病理患者中,我们比较了转诊原因和欧洲放射学会(ESR)指南。然后,我们测量并比较了US和CT对可通过US诊断的疾病的AAP病因鉴定的敏感性。记录ct平均剂量指数(CTDIvol)、剂量长度积(DLP)及其标准差,并利用CT-Expo®软件计算有效剂量(ED)。结果264例(45.05%)患者根据指南及临床对CT要求的怀疑,认为CT检查至关重要。322例患者有转诊理由进行CT扫描,根据指南标准(4、5、6评分)可以认为“可能合适”。其中135例有不适当的CT检查要求。结论更好的临床认识和对参考指南的正确解释可以减少不合理的电离辐射暴露。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are we overusing abdominal computed tomography scans in young patients referred in an emergency for acute abdominal pain?
Purpose The primary objective was to assess the frequency of appropriateness of computed tomography (CT) for acute abdominal pain (AAP) in the emergency department; the secondary aim was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of ultra-sound (US) and CT in the diagnosis of the aetiology of AAP for diseases that can be diagnosed by US; and the third objective was to assess extent to which inappropriate CT examinations for AAP result in ionizing radiation exposure. Material and methods In this retrospective single-centre study, we included patients aged between 15 and 46 years referred to the emergency department for AAP in 2016 and submitted to abdominal CT scans, collecting a total of 586 patients. In 152 patients with the more frequent pathologies, we compared the referral reason and current guidelines of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) IGUIDE®. Then we measured and compared the sensitivity of US and CT for the identification of the aetiology of AAP for diseases whose diagnosis can be reached by US. We also recorded the mean computed tomography dose index (CTDIvol), dose length product (DLP) and its standard deviation, and we calculated the effective dose (ED) using CT-Expo® software. Results According to IGUIDE and based on the clinical suspicion of CT requests, CT examination was considered crucial in 264 (45.05%) patients. 322 patients had a referral reason for CT scan that could be considered “possibly appropriate” according Iguide criteria (4, 5, 6 scoring). Of these, 135 had an inappropriate CT request according to image findings. Conclusions A better clinical framing and a correct interpretation of the reference guidelines could reduce unjustified exposure to ionizing radiation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信