S G Prabhudesai1, S Gould, S Rekhraj, P P Tekkis, G Glazer, P Ziprin. 1. Department of Biosurgery and Surgical Technology, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, St. Mary's Hospital Campus, Room 1029, 10th floor QEQM Building, Praed Street, London, W2 1NY, UK. s.prabhudesai@imperial.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: [corrected] The purpose of the study was to assess the role of artificial neural networks (ANNs) in the diagnosis of appendicitis in patients presenting with acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain and comparing its performance with the assessment made by experienced clinicians and the Alvarado score. METHODS: After training and testing an ANN, data from 60 patients presenting with suspected appendicitis over a 6-month period to a teaching hospital was collected prospectively. Accuracy of diagnosing appendicitis by the clinician, the Alvarado score, and the ANN was compared. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the ANN were 100%, 97.2%, 96.0%, and 100% respectively. The ability of the ANN to exclude accurately the diagnosis of appendicitis in patients without true appendicitis was statistically significant compared to the clinical performance (p=0.031) and Alvarado score of >or=6 (p=0.004) and nearly significant compared to the Alvarado score of >or=7 (p=0.063). CONCLUSIONS: ANNs can be an effective tool for accurately diagnosing appendicitis and may reduce unnecessary appendectomies.
BACKGROUND: [corrected] The purpose of the study was to assess the role of artificial neural networks (ANNs) in the diagnosis of appendicitis in patients presenting with acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain and comparing its performance with the assessment made by experienced clinicians and the Alvarado score. METHODS: After training and testing an ANN, data from 60 patients presenting with suspected appendicitis over a 6-month period to a teaching hospital was collected prospectively. Accuracy of diagnosing appendicitis by the clinician, the Alvarado score, and the ANN was compared. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the ANN were 100%, 97.2%, 96.0%, and 100% respectively. The ability of the ANN to exclude accurately the diagnosis of appendicitis in patients without true appendicitis was statistically significant compared to the clinical performance (p=0.031) and Alvarado score of >or=6 (p=0.004) and nearly significant compared to the Alvarado score of >or=7 (p=0.063). CONCLUSIONS: ANNs can be an effective tool for accurately diagnosing appendicitis and may reduce unnecessary appendectomies.
Authors: J M McGreevy; S R G Finlayson; R Alvarado; W S Laycock; C M Birkmeyer; J D Birkmeyer Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2002-03-26 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: N K Francis; A Luther; E Salib; L Allanby; D Messenger; A S Allison; N J Smart; J B Ockrim Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2015-06-19 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: H G Kenngott; M Wagner; F Nickel; A L Wekerle; A Preukschas; M Apitz; T Schulte; R Rempel; P Mietkowski; F Wagner; A Termer; Beat P Müller-Stich Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2015-02-21 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Manne Andersson; Marie Rubér; Christina Ekerfelt; Hanna Björnsson Hallgren; Gunnar Olaison; Roland E Andersson Journal: World J Surg Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 3.352