Ethem Acar1, Önder Özcan2, Hasan Deliktaş3, Halil Beydilli4, İsmail Kırlı5, Ömer Doğan Alataş4, Cem Şahin5, Birdal Yıldırım4, Ahmet Korkut Belli2. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla, Turkey. dr.ethemacar@hotmail.com. 2. Department of General Surgery, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla, Turkey. 3. Department of Urology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla, Turkey. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla, Turkey. 5. Department of Internal Medicine, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla, Turkey.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Only one diagnostic parameter is not available for acute appendicitis. For the establishment of diagnosis, combination of medical history, clinical, laboratory tests, and radiological imaging modalities are used so as to decrease the rates of negative laparotomy and morbidity secondary to delay in diagnosis. Thepresent study aimed to determine haematological and inflammatory markers which will be used in the discrimination of acute appendicitis (AA) and renal colic which are the most frequent and indistinguishable causes of abdominal pain in patients applying to the emergency service. METHODS: A total of 215 patients who presented with abdominal pain and who were histopathologically diagnosed as AA, and 200 patients who presented with abdominal pain and who were diagnosed as renal colic were included into the study. Control group consisted of 61 patients without any complaints who came to the outpatient clinics of internal medicine only for blood counts. Analyzed blood samples were WBC, RDW, Hb, MCV, MPV, neutrophil, lymphocyte, NLR and PLR. All differences associated with a chance probability of.05 or less were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A statistically significant intergroup difference was seen between AA and renal colic groups as for age, WBC, Hb, MCV, neutrophil, lymphocyte, NLR and PLR. A statistically significant intergroup difference was seen between AA and control groups regarding age, WBC, Hb, RDW, MPV, neutrophil, lymphocyte, NLR and PLR. A statistically significant intergroup difference was seen between renal colic and control groups as for age, WBC, RDW, MPV, neutrophil and NLR. In ROC curve analysis, the area under AUCs for WBC, neutrophil, NLR and PLR were 0.896, 0.916, 0.888 and 0.725, respectively (p≤0.05). CONCLUSION: In the discrimination between patients with renal colic and those without any illness, WBC, RDW, MPV, neutrophil and NLR; in the differentiation between the patients with AA and healthy individuals, WBC, RDW, MPV, neutrophil, lymphocyte, NLR and PLR; and more importantly in the discrimination between patients with AA and those with renal colic who presented to emergency services with abdominal pain WBC, neutrophil, lymphocyte, PLR and NLR can be useful parameters.
BACKGROUND: Only one diagnostic parameter is not available for acute appendicitis. For the establishment of diagnosis, combination of medical history, clinical, laboratory tests, and radiological imaging modalities are used so as to decrease the rates of negative laparotomy and morbidity secondary to delay in diagnosis. Thepresent study aimed to determine haematological and inflammatory markers which will be used in the discrimination of acute appendicitis (AA) and renal colic which are the most frequent and indistinguishable causes of abdominal pain in patients applying to the emergency service. METHODS: A total of 215 patients who presented with abdominal pain and who were histopathologically diagnosed as AA, and 200 patients who presented with abdominal pain and who were diagnosed as renal colic were included into the study. Control group consisted of 61 patients without any complaints who came to the outpatient clinics of internal medicine only for blood counts. Analyzed blood samples were WBC, RDW, Hb, MCV, MPV, neutrophil, lymphocyte, NLR and PLR. All differences associated with a chance probability of.05 or less were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A statistically significant intergroup difference was seen between AA and renal colic groups as for age, WBC, Hb, MCV, neutrophil, lymphocyte, NLR and PLR. A statistically significant intergroup difference was seen between AA and control groups regarding age, WBC, Hb, RDW, MPV, neutrophil, lymphocyte, NLR and PLR. A statistically significant intergroup difference was seen between renal colic and control groups as for age, WBC, RDW, MPV, neutrophil and NLR. In ROC curve analysis, the area under AUCs for WBC, neutrophil, NLR and PLR were 0.896, 0.916, 0.888 and 0.725, respectively (p≤0.05). CONCLUSION: In the discrimination between patients with renal colic and those without any illness, WBC, RDW, MPV, neutrophil and NLR; in the differentiation between the patients with AA and healthy individuals, WBC, RDW, MPV, neutrophil, lymphocyte, NLR and PLR; and more importantly in the discrimination between patients with AA and those with renal colic who presented to emergency services with abdominal pain WBC, neutrophil, lymphocyte, PLR and NLR can be useful parameters.