B S Kelly1,2, S M Bollard3, A Weir1,2, C O'Brien2, D Mullen4, M Kerin3, P McCarthy1. 1. Department of Radiology, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland. 2. Departmentof Radiology, St Vincents University Hospital, Elm park, Dublin, Ireland. 3. Department of Surgery, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland. 4. Department of Pathology, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare pre-operative ultrasound to histopathological results and retrospectively assess the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in paediatric appendicitis. METHODS: 5 year review of all appendectomies performed in patients <16 years old in a tertiary referral university hospital. 983 patients had an appendicectomy over the time period while 189 patients had a preoperative ultrasound. We retrospectively reviewed all of the preoperative imaging in conjunction with the reports for the 189 patients; our aim was to determine the sensitivity of preoperative ultrasound for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. RESULTS: Of the 189 patients who had an ultrasound, 102 had histology positive for appendicitis and 87 had normal histology. Sensitivity overall was 72.55% [95% confidence interval (CI) 62.82 to 80.92] and specificity was 77.01% (95% CI 66.75 to 85.36). A suggested ultrasound diagnosis of appendicitis made positive pathology three times more likely and a normal ultrasound made positive pathology three times less likely [positive-predictive value 3.16 (95% CI 2.11 to 4.72) negative predictive value 0.36 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.50)]. 77% (67/87) of the patients whose pathology was ultimately normal had an ultrasound which was either normal or suggested an alternative diagnosis. However, in the 33 (17%) of patients with a non-visualised appendix, no secondary signs of inflammation or alternative diagnosis 16 (48%) had pathologically confirmed appendicitis. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound has the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy in clinically ambiguous appendicitis. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This paper furthers the evidence on the efficacy of ultrasound as a diagnostic tool in acute appendicitis in children, especially when the diagnosis is clinically equivocal. It also sheds further light on the "non-visualized appendix" with almost half of these patients having pathologically confirmed appendicitis; meaning advanced imaging with CT or MR may be indicated in this cohort.
OBJECTIVE: To compare pre-operative ultrasound to histopathological results and retrospectively assess the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in paediatric appendicitis. METHODS: 5 year review of all appendectomies performed in patients <16 years old in a tertiary referral university hospital. 983 patients had an appendicectomy over the time period while 189 patients had a preoperative ultrasound. We retrospectively reviewed all of the preoperative imaging in conjunction with the reports for the 189 patients; our aim was to determine the sensitivity of preoperative ultrasound for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. RESULTS: Of the 189 patients who had an ultrasound, 102 had histology positive for appendicitis and 87 had normal histology. Sensitivity overall was 72.55% [95% confidence interval (CI) 62.82 to 80.92] and specificity was 77.01% (95% CI 66.75 to 85.36). A suggested ultrasound diagnosis of appendicitis made positive pathology three times more likely and a normal ultrasound made positive pathology three times less likely [positive-predictive value 3.16 (95% CI 2.11 to 4.72) negative predictive value 0.36 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.50)]. 77% (67/87) of the patients whose pathology was ultimately normal had an ultrasound which was either normal or suggested an alternative diagnosis. However, in the 33 (17%) of patients with a non-visualised appendix, no secondary signs of inflammation or alternative diagnosis 16 (48%) had pathologically confirmed appendicitis. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound has the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy in clinically ambiguous appendicitis. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This paper furthers the evidence on the efficacy of ultrasound as a diagnostic tool in acute appendicitis in children, especially when the diagnosis is clinically equivocal. It also sheds further light on the "non-visualized appendix" with almost half of these patients having pathologically confirmed appendicitis; meaning advanced imaging with CT or MR may be indicated in this cohort.
Authors: Jennifer L Carpenter; Robert C Orth; Wei Zhang; Monica E Lopez; Kate L Mangona; R Paul Guillerman Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: J Matthew Fields; Joshua Davis; Carl Alsup; Amanda Bates; Arthur Au; Srikar Adhikari; Isaac Farrell Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2017-08-21 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Sara C Fallon; Robert C Orth; R Paul Guillerman; Martha M Munden; Wei Zhang; Simone C Elder; Andrea T Cruz; Mary L Brandt; Monica E Lopez; George S Bisset Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2015-08-18
Authors: Patrick M Bossuyt; Johannes B Reitsma; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Paul P Glasziou; Les Irwig; Jeroen G Lijmer; David Moher; Drummond Rennie; Henrica C W de Vet; Herbert Y Kressel; Nader Rifai; Robert M Golub; Douglas G Altman; Lotty Hooft; Daniël A Korevaar; Jérémie F Cohen Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Marcos Roberto Gomes de Queiroz; Miguel José Francisco Neto; Antonio Rahal Junior; Victor Arantes Jabour; Guilherme Neves Lourenço Andrade; Paulo Savoia Dias da Silva; Rodrigo Gobbo Garcia; Marcelo Dos Santos Pereira; Marina Ramos Santos; Pedro Andrade Alencar Luna; Yoshino Tamaki Sameshima; Fabiana Gual; Marcelo Guimarães Dutra; Beatriz Placca Germino; Isabella Ferreira Alves Journal: Einstein (Sao Paulo) Date: 2022-07-04