Literature DB >> 34905621

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Nigel D'Souza1, Georgina Hicks2, Richard Beable3, Antony Higginson3, Bo Rud4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Appendicitis remains a difficult disease to diagnose, and imaging adjuncts are commonly employed. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an imaging test that can be used to diagnose appendicitis. It is not commonly regarded as a first-line imaging test for appendicitis, but the reported diagnostic accuracy in some studies is equivalent to computed tomography (CT) scans. As it does not expose patients to radiation, it is an attractive imaging modality, particularly in women and children.
OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for detecting appendicitis in all patients. Secondary objectives: To investigate the accuracy of MRI in subgroups of pregnant women, children, and adults. To investigate the potential influence of MRI scanning variables such as sequences, slice thickness, or field of view. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase until February 2021. We searched the references of included studies and other systematic reviews to identify further studies. We did not exclude studies that were unpublished, published in another language, or retrospective. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that compared the outcome of an MRI scan for suspected appendicitis with a reference standard of histology, intraoperative findings, or clinical follow-up. Three study team members independently filtered search results for eligible studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently extracted study data and assessed study quality using the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy - Revised (QUADAS-2) tool. We used the bivariate model to calculate pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. MAIN
RESULTS: We identified 58 studies with sufficient data for meta-analysis including a total of 7462 participants (1980 with and 5482 without acute appendicitis). Estimates of sensitivity ranged from 0.18 to 1.0; estimates of specificity ranged from 0.4 to 1.0. Summary sensitivity was 0.95 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 0.97); summary specificity was 0.96 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.97). Sensitivity and specificity remained high on subgroup analysis for pregnant women (sensitivity 0.96 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99); specificity 0.97 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.98); 21 studies, 2282 women); children (sensitivity 0.96 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.97); specificity 0.96 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.98); 17 studies, 2794 children); and adults (sensitivity 0.96 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.97); specificity 0.93 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.98); 9 studies, 1088 participants), as well as different scanning techniques. In a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients, there would be 12 false-positive results and 30 false-negative results. Methodological quality of the included studies was poor, and the risk of bias was high or unclear in 53% to 83% of the QUADAS-2 domains. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: MRI appears to be highly accurate in confirming and excluding acute appendicitis in adults, children, and pregnant women regardless of protocol. The methodological quality of the included studies was generally low due to incomplete and low standards of follow-up, so summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity may be biased. We could not assess the impact and direction of potential bias given the very low number of high-quality studies. Studies comparing MRI protocols were few, and although we found no influence of MRI protocol variables on the summary estimates of accuracy, our results do not rule out that some MRI protocols are more accurate than others.
Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34905621      PMCID: PMC8670723          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012028.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  166 in total

Review 1.  Imaging strategies for right lower quadrant pain in pregnancy.

Authors:  Svati Singla Long; Christopher Long; Hong Lai; Katarzyna J Macura
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Appendiceal appearances: the great imitator.

Authors:  G Modgil; D I Cooke; L Newbury
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.791

3.  Macroscopic findings at appendicectomy are unreliable: implications for laparoscopy and malignant conditions of the appendix.

Authors:  John K Roberts; Masoud Behravesh; Janek Dmitrewski
Journal:  Int J Surg Pathol       Date:  2008-04-02       Impact factor: 1.271

4.  Evaluation of a sequential multi-modality imaging algorithm for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in the pregnant female.

Authors:  Vijay Ramalingam; Christina LeBedis; Jacqueline R Kelly; Jennifer Uyeda; Jorge A Soto; Stephan W Anderson
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2014-08-23

5.  Imaging utilization affects negative appendectomy rates in appendicitis: An ACS-NSQIP study.

Authors:  Joshua Tseng; Tara Cohen; Nicolas Melo; Rodrigo F Alban
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2019-01-03       Impact factor: 2.565

6.  Diagnostic Accuracy of MRI Versus CT for the Evaluation of Acute Appendicitis in Children and Young Adults.

Authors:  Sonja Kinner; Perry J Pickhardt; Erica L Riedesel; Kara G Gill; Jessica B Robbins; Douglas R Kitchin; Timothy J Ziemlewicz; John B Harringa; Scott B Reeder; Michael D Repplinger
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  MRI for clinically suspected appendicitis during pregnancy.

Authors:  Lodewijk P Cobben; Ingrid Groot; Lucien Haans; Johan G Blickman; Julien Puylaert
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Emergency MRI utilization trends at a tertiary care academic medical center: baseline data.

Authors:  David Rankey; James L Leach; Sabrina D Leach
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 3.173

9.  White cell count and C-reactive protein measurement in patients with possible appendicitis.

Authors:  Anshuman Sengupta; George Bax; Simon Paterson-Brown
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2008-12-19       Impact factor: 1.891

10.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging Provides Useful Diagnostic Information Following Equivocal Ultrasound in Children With Suspected Appendicitis [Formula: see text].

Authors:  Jelena Komanchuk; Dori-Ann Martin; Rory Killam; Robin Eccles; Mary E Brindle; Ijab Khanafer; Ari R Joffe; Jaime Blackwood; Weiming Yu; Priya Gupta; Sanjay Sethi; Vijay Moorjani; Graham Thompson
Journal:  Can Assoc Radiol J       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 2.248

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Authors:  Nigel D'Souza; Georgina Hicks; Richard Beable; Antony Higginson; Bo Rud
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-12-14

2.  Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in the paediatric population with acute right iliac fossa pain, our District General Hospital experience.

Authors:  Rabia Ghani; A O'Connor; I Sajid; G Johnson; S Ullah
Journal:  Ulster Med J       Date:  2022-02-11

3.  Diagnostic, Therapy and Complications in Acute Appendicitis of 19,749 Cases Based on Routine Data: A Retrospective Multicenter Observational Study.

Authors:  Claus W Schildberg; Kathrin Reissig; Richard Hunger; Christoph Paasch; Rosi Stillger; René Mantke
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-08-02       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 4.  Mean Platelet Volume in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis in the Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Nellai Krishnan; Sachit Anand; Niklas Pakkasjärvi; Minu Bajpai; Anjan Kumar Dhua; Devendra Kumar Yadav
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-30
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.