Seong Jong Yun1, Chang-Woo Ryu2, Na Young Choi2, Hyun Cheol Kim2, Ji Young Oh2, Dal Mo Yang2. 1. 1 Department of Medicine, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 2. 2 Department of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, 892 Dongnam-ro, Gangdong-Gu, Seoul 134-727, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A meta-analysis was performed to compare low-dose CT and standard-dose CT in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis with an emphasis on diagnostic value. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search for articles published through June 2016 was performed to identify studies that compared low-dose CT with standard-dose CT for the evaluation of patients suspected of having acute appendicitis. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity with 95% CIs were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model. Meta-regression was used to perform statistical comparisons of low-dose CT and standard-dose CT. RESULTS: Of 154 studies, nine studies investigating a total of 2957 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of low-dose CT were 96.25% (95% CI, 91.88-98.31%) and 93.22% (95% CI, 88.75-96.00%), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of standard-dose CT were 96.40% (95% CI, 93.55-98.02%) and 92.17% (95% CI, 88.24-94.86%), respectively. In a joint model estimation of meta-regression, lowand standard-dose CT did not show a statistically significant difference (p = 0.71). Both lowand standard-dose CT seem to be characterized by high positive and negative predictive values across a broad spectrum of pretest probabilities for acute appendicitis. CONCLUSION: Low-dose CT is highly effective for the diagnosis of suspected appendicitis and can be considered a valid alternative first-line imaging test that reduces the potential risk of exposure to ionizing radiation.
OBJECTIVE: A meta-analysis was performed to compare low-dose CT and standard-dose CT in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis with an emphasis on diagnostic value. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search for articles published through June 2016 was performed to identify studies that compared low-dose CT with standard-dose CT for the evaluation of patients suspected of having acute appendicitis. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity with 95% CIs were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model. Meta-regression was used to perform statistical comparisons of low-dose CT and standard-dose CT. RESULTS: Of 154 studies, nine studies investigating a total of 2957 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of low-dose CT were 96.25% (95% CI, 91.88-98.31%) and 93.22% (95% CI, 88.75-96.00%), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of standard-dose CT were 96.40% (95% CI, 93.55-98.02%) and 92.17% (95% CI, 88.24-94.86%), respectively. In a joint model estimation of meta-regression, lowand standard-dose CT did not show a statistically significant difference (p = 0.71). Both lowand standard-dose CT seem to be characterized by high positive and negative predictive values across a broad spectrum of pretest probabilities for acute appendicitis. CONCLUSION: Low-dose CT is highly effective for the diagnosis of suspected appendicitis and can be considered a valid alternative first-line imaging test that reduces the potential risk of exposure to ionizing radiation.
Authors: Ji Hoon Park; Jong-June Jeon; Sung Soo Lee; Amar C Dhanantwari; Ji Ye Sim; Hae Young Kim; Kyoung Ho Lee Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Michael R Torkzad; Arnar Thorisson; Abbas Chabok; Maziar Nikberg; Roland E Andersson; Fausto Labruto Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2022-05-16 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Suvi Sippola; Juha Grönroos; Ville Sallinen; Tero Rautio; Pia Nordström; Tuomo Rantanen; Saija Hurme; Ari Leppäniemi; Sanna Meriläinen; Johanna Laukkarinen; Heini Savolainen; Johanna Virtanen; Paulina Salminen Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-11-03 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Dominik Zinsser; Michael Maurer; Phuong-Linh Do; Jakob Weiß; Mike Notohamiprodjo; Fabian Bamberg; Ahmed E Othman Journal: BMC Med Imaging Date: 2019-01-11 Impact factor: 1.930