Literature DB >> 11526267

Acute appendicitis: comparison of helical CT diagnosis focused technique with oral contrast material versus nonfocused technique with oral and intravenous contrast material.

J E Jacobs1, B A Birnbaum, M Macari, A J Megibow, G Israel, D D Maki, A M Aguiar, C P Langlotz.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of focused helical computed tomography (CT) with orally administered contrast material with that of nonfocused helical CT with orally and intravenously administered contrast material.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: After receiving oral contrast material, 228 patients with clinically suspected appendicitis underwent focused appendiceal CT (5-mm section thickness, 15-cm coverage in the right lower quadrant). Immediately thereafter, helical CT of the entire abdomen and pelvis was performed following intravenous administration of contrast material (abdomen, 7-mm section thickness; pelvis, 5-mm section thickness). Studies were separated and independently interpreted by three observers who were blinded to patient names. Diagnoses were established by means of surgical and/or clinical follow-up findings.
RESULTS: Fifty-one (22.4%) of 228 patients had acute appendicitis. Readers diagnosed appendicitis with 83.3%, 73.8%, and 71.4% sensitivity and 93.0%, 92.3%, and 97.9% specificity with focused nonenhanced appendiceal CT. Readers diagnosed appendicitis with 92.9%, 92.9%, and 88.1% sensitivity and 93.7%, 95.1%, and 96.5% specificity with nonfocused enhanced CT. Summary areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve estimates for focused nonenhanced and nonfocused enhanced CT were 0.916 and 0.964, respectively; the differences were statistically significant (P <.05) for two of three readers. All readers demonstrated higher sensitivities for detecting the inflamed appendix with nonfocused enhanced CT. Appendicitis was missed with focused CT in two patients whose inflamed appendix was not included in the imaging of the right lower quadrant. All readers were significantly more confident in diagnosing alternative conditions with nonfocused enhanced CT.
CONCLUSION: Diagnostic accuracy of helical CT for acute appendicitis improved significantly with use of intravenous contrast material.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11526267     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2202001557

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  31 in total

1.  Neutral vs positive oral contrast in diagnosing acute appendicitis with contrast-enhanced CT: sensitivity, specificity, reader confidence and interpretation time.

Authors:  D M Naeger; S D Chang; P Kolli; V Shah; W Huang; R F Thoeni
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-10-19       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Multidetector-row CT of the appendix in healthy adults.

Authors:  Pamela T Johnson; John Eng; Carolyn J Moore; Karen M Horton; Elliot K Fishman
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2006-07-04

3.  Rapid CT diagnosis of acute appendicitis with IV contrast material.

Authors:  Sandra Mun; Randy D Ernst; Kevin Chen; Aytekin Oto; Shree Shah; William J Mileski
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2005-12-17

4.  A novel reporting system to improve accuracy in appendicitis imaging.

Authors:  Benjamin D Godwin; Frederick T Drake; Vlad V Simianu; Jabi E Shriki; Daniel S Hippe; Manjiri Dighe; Sarah Bastawrous; Carlos Cuevas; David Flum; Puneet Bhargava
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Predictors of appendicitis on computed tomography among cases with borderline appendix size.

Authors:  Atalie C Thompson; Eric W Olcott; Peter D Poullos; R Brooke Jeffrey; Matthew O Thompson; Jarrett Rosenberg; Lewis K Shin
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2015-02-17

6.  Intravenous contrast-enhanced computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Authors:  Naoko Iwahashi; Yoshimi Kitagawa; Toshihiko Mayumi; Hiroshi Kohno
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Should Oral Contrast Be Omitted in Patients with Suspected Appendicitis?

Authors:  Lily Saadat; Irene Helenowski; David Mahvi; Anne-Marie Boller
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Atypical appendicitis: diagnostic value of volume-rendered reconstructions obtained with 16-slice multidetector-row CT.

Authors:  A A Stabile Ianora; M Moschetta; V Lorusso; A Scardapane
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2009-09-22       Impact factor: 3.469

9.  CT scan for suspected acute abdominal process: impact of combinations of IV, oral, and rectal contrast.

Authors:  Brian C Hill; Scott C Johnson; Emily K Owens; Jennifer L Gerber; Anthony J Senagore
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  The equivocal appendix at CT: prevalence in a control population.

Authors:  Emily M Webb; Zhen J Wang; Fergus V Coakley; Liina Poder; Antonio C Westphalen; Benjamin M Yeh
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2009-07-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.