Histologic severity of appendicitis can be predicted by computed tomography

Archives of Surgery

Volumn 139, Issue 12, 2004, Pages 1304-1308

  Hansen, Adam J ^a   Young, Scott W ^a   De Petris, Giovanni ^a   Tessier, Deron J ^a   Hernandez, Jose L ^a   Johnson, Daniel J ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACUTE APPENDICITIS; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; APPENDECTOMY; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ACUTE DISEASE; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; APPENDICITIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 10044274232     PISSN: 00040010     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.139.12.1304     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Korner H, Sondenaa K, Soreide JA, et al. Incidence of acute nonperforated and perforated appendicitis: age-specific and sex-specific analysis. World J Surg. 1997;21:313-317.
2. Balthazar EJ, Rofsky NM, Zucker R. Appendicitis: the impact of computed tomography imaging on negative appendectomy and perforation rates. Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;93:768-771.
3. Stroman DL, Bayouth CV, Kuhn JA, et al. The role of computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Am J Surg. 1999;178:485-489.
4. Colson M, Skinner KA, Dunnington G. High negative appendectomy rates are no longer acceptable. Am J Surg. 1997;174:723-727.
5. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Rattner DW, Venus LG, Novelline RA. Introduction of appendiceal CT: impact on negative appendectomy and appendiceal perforation rates. Ann Surg. 1999;229:344-349.
6. Balthazar EJ, Megibow AJ, Siegel SE, Birnbaum BA. Appendicitis: prospective evaluation with high-resolution CT. Radiology. 1991;180:21-24.
7. Raman SS, Lu DS, Kadell BM, Vodopich DJ, Sayre J, Cryer H. Accuracy of non-focused helical CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a 5-year review. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178:1319-1325.
8. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA, Mostafavi AA, McCabe CJ. Effect of computed tomography of the appendix on treatment of patients and use of hospital resources. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:141-146.
9. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA, Mostafavi AA, Lawrason JN, McCabe CJ. Helical CT combined with contrast material administered only through the colon for imaging of suspected appendicitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:1275-1280.
10. Choi YH, Fischer E, Hoda SA, et al. Appendiceal CT in 140 cases: diagnostic criteria for acute and necrotizing appendicitis. Clin Imaging. 1998;22:252-271.
11. Velanovich V, Satava R. Balancing the normal appendectomy rate with the perforated appendicitis rate: implications for quality assurance. Am Surg. 1992;58:264-269.
12. Berry J Jr, Malt RA. Appendicitis near its centenary. Ann Surg. 1984;200:567-575.
13. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA. Sensitivity and specificity of the individual CT signs of appendicitis: experience with 200 helical appendiceal CT examinations. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1997;21:686-692.
14. Rettenbacher T, Hollerweger A, Macheiner P, et al. Outer diameter of the vermiform appendix as a sign of acute appendicitis: evaluation at US. Radiology. 2001;218:757-762.
15. Weyant MJ, Eachempati SR, Maluccio MA, et al. Interpretation of computed tomography does not correlate with laboratory or pathologic findings in surgically confirmed acute appendicitis. Surgery. 2000;128:145-152.
16. Gwynn LK. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis: clinical assessment versus computed tomography evaluation. J Emerg Med. 2001;21:119-123.
17. Raptopoulos V, Katsou G, Rosen MP, Siewert B, Goldberg SN, Kruskal JB. Acute appendicitis: effect of increased use of CT on selecting patients earlier. Radiology. 2003;226:521-526.
18. van den Broek WT, Bijnen BB, Rijbroek B, Gouma DJ. Scoring and diagnostic laparoscopy for suspected appendicitis. Eur J Surg. 2002;168:349-354.
19. Christian F, Christian GP. A simple scoring system to reduce the negative appendicectomy rate. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1992;74:281-285.
20. Alvarado A. A practical score for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Ann Emerg Med. 1986;15:557-564.
21. Jacobs JE, Birnbaum BA, Macari M, et al. Acute appendicitis: comparison of helical CT diagnosis focused technique with oral contrast material versus nonfocused technique with oral and intravenous contrast material. Radiology. 2001;220:683-690.
22. Kirshenbaum M, Mishra V, Kuo D, Kaplan G. Resolving appendicitis: role of CT. Abdom Imaging. 2003;28:276-279.
23. Oliak D, Yamini D, Udani VM, et al. Nonoperative management of perforated appendicitis without periappendiceal mass. Am J Surg. 2000;179:177-181.
24. Bagi P, Dueholm S. Nonoperative management of the ultrasonically evaluated appendiceal mass. Surgery. 1987;101:602-605.
25. Soeken K, Prescott P. Issues in the use of kappa to estimate reliability. Med Care. 1986;24:733-741.
26. Norman GR, Streiner DL. Biostatistics: The Bare Essentials. 2nd ed. Hamilton, Ontario: BC Decker Inc; 2000:324.
27. Ransohoff D, Feinstein A. Problems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. N Engl J Med. 1978;299:926-930.