The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians · 2014
Single institution and statewide performance of ultrasound in diagnosing appendicitis in pregnancy.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание 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.
Drake Frederick T, Kotagal Meera, Simmons LaVone E, Parr Zoe, Dighe Manjiri K, Flum David R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Assess the performance of ultrasound (US) in pregnant patients presenting with acute abdominal pain concerning for appendicitis.
METHODS: Descriptive analysis of pregnant patients who underwent an US for acute abdominal pain over a 6-year period using data from a statewide quality improvement collaborative and a single center.
RESULTS: Statewide, 131 pregnant patients underwent an appendectomy and 85% had an US. In our single-center case series, 49 pregnant patients underwent an US for acute abdominal pain and four patients had appendicitis (8%). Of those, three were definitively diagnosed with US. The appendix was visualized by US in five patients (3 appendicitis/2 normal). Mean gestational age was 11 weeks for visualization of the appendix versus 20 weeks for non-visualization (p < 0.001). Concordance between US and pathology was similar statewide and at our institution (43%).
CONCLUSIONS: US appears to play a central role in the evaluation of appendicitis in pregnant women, especially in the first trimester, and often contributes to definitive disposition. US performed less well in excluding appendicitis; however, in certain clinical settings, providers appeared to trust US findings. From these results, we developed a multidisciplinary imaging pathway for pregnant patients who present with acute abdominal pain concerning for appendicitis.
METHODS: Descriptive analysis of pregnant patients who underwent an US for acute abdominal pain over a 6-year period using data from a statewide quality improvement collaborative and a single center.
RESULTS: Statewide, 131 pregnant patients underwent an appendectomy and 85% had an US. In our single-center case series, 49 pregnant patients underwent an US for acute abdominal pain and four patients had appendicitis (8%). Of those, three were definitively diagnosed with US. The appendix was visualized by US in five patients (3 appendicitis/2 normal). Mean gestational age was 11 weeks for visualization of the appendix versus 20 weeks for non-visualization (p < 0.001). Concordance between US and pathology was similar statewide and at our institution (43%).
CONCLUSIONS: US appears to play a central role in the evaluation of appendicitis in pregnant women, especially in the first trimester, and often contributes to definitive disposition. US performed less well in excluding appendicitis; however, in certain clinical settings, providers appeared to trust US findings. From these results, we developed a multidisciplinary imaging pathway for pregnant patients who present with acute abdominal pain concerning for appendicitis.