American journal of surgery · 2018
Size matters: Computed tomographic measurements of the appendix in emergency department scans.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Moskowitz Eliza, Khan Abid D, Cribari Chris, Schroeppel Thomas J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Radiologists use a size cutoff in appendiceal diameter to assist surgeons in diagnosing appendicitis, however, no consensus exists as to the size of a normal adult appendix. We aim to evaluate radial appendiceal diameter on CT in adult patients both with and without appendicitis.
METHODS: Retrospective review of adults who underwent abdominal CT was performed. Variables collected include: demographics, BMI, WBC count at presentation, radial diameter of appendix (mm), presence of fat stranding, fecalith, and free fluid.
RESULTS: During the study period, 3099 patients underwent CT. The appendix was visualized on 74% of scans. Mean appendiceal diameter was 6.6 mm (±1.7). The appendix was larger in patients with appendicitis (6.6 vs. 11.4; p < 0.0001). Overall appendectomy incidence was 3.2%. Sensitivity and specificity of CT in diagnosing appendicitis in this cohort of patients were 90% and 94%. NPV was 99.5%.
CONCLUSION: While appendiceal diameter was larger in patients with appendicitis, >20% of patients without appendicitis had an appendiceal diameter >7 mm. Diameter alone should not be relied upon to diagnose appendicitis.
METHODS: Retrospective review of adults who underwent abdominal CT was performed. Variables collected include: demographics, BMI, WBC count at presentation, radial diameter of appendix (mm), presence of fat stranding, fecalith, and free fluid.
RESULTS: During the study period, 3099 patients underwent CT. The appendix was visualized on 74% of scans. Mean appendiceal diameter was 6.6 mm (±1.7). The appendix was larger in patients with appendicitis (6.6 vs. 11.4; p < 0.0001). Overall appendectomy incidence was 3.2%. Sensitivity and specificity of CT in diagnosing appendicitis in this cohort of patients were 90% and 94%. NPV was 99.5%.
CONCLUSION: While appendiceal diameter was larger in patients with appendicitis, >20% of patients without appendicitis had an appendiceal diameter >7 mm. Diameter alone should not be relied upon to diagnose appendicitis.