Literature DB >> 20053244

An interdisciplinary initiative to reduce radiation exposure: evaluation of appendicitis in a pediatric emergency department with clinical assessment supported by a staged ultrasound and computed tomography pathway.

Naresh Ramarajan1, Rajesh Krishnamoorthi, Richard Barth, Pejman Ghanouni, Claudia Mueller, Bernard Dannenburg, N Ewen Wang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: In the emergency department (ED), a significant amount of radiation exposure is due to computed tomography (CT) scans performed for the diagnosis of appendicitis. Children are at increased risk of developing cancer from low-dose radiation and it is therefore desirable to utilize CT only when appropriate. Ultrasonography (US) eliminates radiation but has sensitivity inferior to that of CT. We describe an interdisciplinary initiative to use a staged US and CT pathway to maximize diagnostic accuracy while minimizing radiation exposure.
METHODS: This was a retrospective outcomes analysis of patients presenting after hours for suspected appendicitis at an academic children's hospital ED over a 6-year period. The pathway established US as the initial imaging modality. CT was recommended only if US was equivocal. Clinical and pathologic outcomes from ED diagnosis and disposition, histopathology and return visits, were correlated with the US and CT. ED diagnosis and disposition, pathology, and return visits were used to determine outcome.
RESULTS: A total of 680 patients met the study criteria. A total of 407 patients (60%) followed the pathway. Two-hundred of these (49%) were managed definitively without CT. A total of 106 patients (26%) had a positive US for appendicitis; 94 (23%) had a negative US. A total of 207 patients had equivocal US with follow-up CT. A total of 144 patients went to the operating room (OR); 10 patients (7%) had negative appendectomies. One case of appendicitis was missed (<0.5%). The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive values of our staged US-CT pathway were 99%, 91%, 99%, and 85%, respectively. A total of 228 of 680 patients (34%) had an equivocal US with no follow-up CT. Of these patients, 10 (4%) went to the OR with one negative appendectomy. A total of 218 patients (32%) were observed clinically without complications.
CONCLUSIONS: Half of the patients who were treated using this pathway were managed with definitive US alone with an acceptable negative appendectomy rate (7%) and a missed appendicitis rate of less than 0.5%. Visualization of a normal appendix (negative US) was sufficient to obviate the need for a CT in the authors' experience. Emergency physicians (EPs) used an equivocal US in conjunction with clinical assessment to care for one-third of study patients without a CT and with no known cases of missed appendicitis. These data suggest that by employing US first on all children needing diagnostic imaging for diagnosis of acute appendicitis, radiation exposure may be substantially decreased without a decrease in safety or efficacy. (c) 2009 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20053244     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00511.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  28 in total

1.  Performance characteristics of magnetic resonance imaging without contrast agents or sedation in pediatric appendicitis.

Authors:  Ryne A Didier; Katharine L Hopkins; Fergus V Coakley; Sanjay Krishnaswami; David M Spiro; Bryan R Foster
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2017-06-19

2.  Effect of surgeon's judgement on the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Authors:  Mustafa Hasbahçeci; Cengiz Erol; Mustafa Törü; Mehmet Şeker
Journal:  Ulus Cerrahi Derg       Date:  2014-03-01

Review 3.  The future of pediatric US.

Authors:  Brian D Coley
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2011-04-27

4.  Use and accuracy of diagnostic imaging in the evaluation of pediatric appendicitis.

Authors:  Meera Kotagal; Morgan K Richards; David R Flum; Stephanie P Acierno; Robert L Weinsheimer; Adam B Goldin
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  2014-12-06       Impact factor: 2.545

Review 5.  Pediatric emergency medicine point-of-care ultrasound: summary of the evidence.

Authors:  Jennifer R Marin; Alyssa M Abo; Alexander C Arroyo; Stephanie J Doniger; Jason W Fischer; Rachel Rempell; Brandi Gary; James F Holmes; David O Kessler; Samuel H F Lam; Marla C Levine; Jason A Levy; Alice Murray; Lorraine Ng; Vicki E Noble; Daniela Ramirez-Schrempp; David C Riley; Turandot Saul; Vaishali Shah; Adam B Sivitz; Ee Tein Tay; David Teng; Lindsey Chaudoin; James W Tsung; Rebecca L Vieira; Yaffa M Vitberg; Resa E Lewiss
Journal:  Crit Ultrasound J       Date:  2016-11-03

6.  Implementation of an Electronic Clinical Decision Support Tool for Pediatric Appendicitis Within a Hospital Network.

Authors:  Marissa A Hendrickson; Andrew R Wey; Philippe R Gaillard; Anupam B Kharbanda
Journal:  Pediatr Emerg Care       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.454

7.  US depiction of the appendix: role of abdominal wall thickness and appendiceal location.

Authors:  Matthew Butler; Sabah Servaes; Abhay Srinivasan; J Chris Edgar; Gloria Del Pozo; Kassa Darge
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2011-08-09

8.  Prospective evaluation of a clinical practice guideline for diagnosis of appendicitis in children.

Authors:  Genevieve Santillanes; Sonia Simms; Marianne Gausche-Hill; Michael Diament; Brant Putnam; Richard Renslo; Jumie Lee; Elga Tinger; Roger J Lewis
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 3.451

Review 9.  Improvement in the diagnosis of appendicitis.

Authors:  Frederick Thurston Drake; David Reed Flum
Journal:  Adv Surg       Date:  2013

10.  Progress in the diagnosis of appendicitis: a report from Washington State's Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program.

Authors:  Frederick Thurston Drake; Michael G Florence; Morris G Johnson; Gregory J Jurkovich; Steve Kwon; Zeila Schmidt; Richard C Thirlby; David R Flum
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 12.969

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.