Update on Imaging for Acute Appendicitis

Surgical Clinics of North America

Volumn 91, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 141-154

  Parks, Nancy A ^a   Schroeppel, Thomas J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Acute; Appendicitis; CT; Imaging; MRI; US

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL RADIOGRAPHY; ACUTE APPENDICITIS; APPENDECTOMY; APPENDIX PERFORATION; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DELAYED DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; HUMAN; IONIZING RADIATION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SCREENING TEST; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TYPHLITIS; ULTRASOUND;

ACUTE DISEASE; APPENDECTOMY; APPENDICITIS; APPENDIX; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 78650299714     PISSN: 00396109     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.suc.2010.10.017     Document Type: Review

References (43)

1. Addiss D.G., Shaffer N., Fowler B.S., et al. The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol 1990, 132:910-925.
2. Rybkin A.V., Thoeni R.F. Current concepts in imaging of appendicitis. Radiol Clin North Am 2007, 45:411-422.
3. Cuschieri J., Florence M., Flum D.R., et al. The SCOAP Collaborative. Negative appendectomy and imaging accuracy in the Washington State Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program. Ann Surg 2008, 248:557-563.
4. Old J.L., Dusing R.W., Yap W., et al. Imaging for suspected appendicitis. Am Fam Physician 2005, 71:71-78.
5. Rypins E.B., Evans D.G., Hinrichs W., et al. Tc-99m-HMPAO white blood cell scan for diagnosis of acute appendicitis in patients with equivocal clinical presentation. Ann Surg 1997, 226:58-65.
6. Baker S.R. Acute appendicitis: plain radiographic considerations. Emerg Radiol 1996, 3:63-69.
7. Prystowsky J.B., Pugh C.M., Nagle A.P. Appendicitis. Curr Probl Surg 2005, 42:694-742.
8. Van Randen A., Bipat S., Zwinderman A.H., et al. Acute appendicitis: meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of CT and graded compression US related to prevalence of disease. Radiology 2008, 249:97-106.
9. Doria A.S., Moineddin R., Kellenberger C.J., et al. US or CT for diagnosis of appendicitis in children and adults? A meta-analysis. Radiology 2006, 241:83-94.
10. Keyzer C., Zalcman M., De Maertelaer V., et al. Comparison of US and unenhanced multi-detector row CT in patients suspected of having acute appendicitis. Radiology 2005, 236:527-534.
11. Poortman P., Oostvogel H.J.M., Bosma E., et al. Improving diagnosis of acute appendicitis: results of a diagnostic pathway with standard use of ultrasonography followed by selective use of CT. J Am Coll Surg 2009, 208:434-441.
12. Hernandez J.A., Swischuk L.E., Angel C.A., et al. Imaging of acute appendicitis: US as the primary imaging modality. Pediatr Radiol 2005, 35:392-395.
13. Patel S.J., Reede D.L., Katz D.S., et al. Imaging the pregnant patient for nonobstetric conditions: algorithms & radiation dose considerations. Radiographics 2007, 27(6):1705-1722.
14. Birnbaum B.A., Wilson S.R. Appendicitis at the millennium. Radiology 2000, 215:337-348.
15. Holloway J.A., Westerbuhr L.M., Chain J., et al. Is appendiceal computed tomography in a community hospital useful?. Am J Surg 2003, 186:682-684.
16. Whitley S., Sookur P., McLean A., et al. The appendix on CT. Clin Radiol 2009, 64:190-199.
17. Brown M.A. Imaging acute appendicitis. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2008, 29:293-307.
18. Rao P.M., Rhea J.T., Novelline R.A., et al. Effect of computed tomography of the appendix on treatment of patients and use of hospital resources. N Engl J Med 1998, 338:141-146.
19. Kamel I.R., Goldberg S.N., Keogan M.T., et al. Right lower quadrant pain and suspected appendicitis: nonfocused appendiceal CT-review of 100 cases. Radiology 2000, 217:159-163.
20. Lane M.J., Liu D.M., Huynh M.D., et al. Suspected acute appendicitis: nonenhanced helical CT in 300 consecutive patients. Radiology 1999, 213:341-346.
21. Mittal V.K., Goliath J., Sabir M., et al. Advantages of focused helical computed tomographic scanning with rectal contrast only vs triple contrast in the diagnosis of clinically uncertain acute appendicitis. Arch Surg 2004, 139:495-500.
22. Birnbaum B.A., Jeffrey R.B. CT and sonographic evaluation of acute right lower quadrant abdominal pain. AJR 1998, 170:361-371.
23. Perez J., Barone J.E., Wilbanks T.O., et al. Liberal use of computed tomography scanning does not improve diagnostic accuracy in appendicitis. Am J Surg 2003, 185:194-197.
24. Vadeboncoeur T.F., Heister R.R., Behling C.A., et al. Impact of helical computed tomography on the rate of negative appendicitis. Am J Emerg Med 2006, 24:43-47.
25. Morris K.T., Kavanagh M., Hansen P., et al. The rational use of computed tomography scans in the diagnosis of appendicitis. Am J Surg 2002, 183:547-550.
26. Lee S.L., Walsh A.J., Ho H.S. Computed tomography and ultrasonography do not improve and may delay the diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis. Arch Surg 2001, 136:556-562.
27. Naoum J.J., Mileski W.J., Daller J.A., et al. The use of abdominal computed tomography scan decreases the frequency of misdiagnosis in cases of suspected appendicitis. Am J Surg 2002, 184:587-590.
28. Singh A., Danrad R., Hahn P.F., et al. MR imaging of the acute abdomen and pelvis: acute appendicitis and beyond. Radiographics 2007, 27:1419-1431.
29. Tkacz J.N., Anderson S.A., Soto J. MR imaging in gastrointestinal emergencies. Radiographics 2009, 29:1767-1780.
30. Cobben L., Groot I., Kingma L., et al. A simple MRI protocol in patients with clinically suspected appendicitis: results in 138 patients and effect on outcome of appendectomy. Eur Radiol 2009, 19:1175-1183.
31. Andersen B., Nielsen T.K. Appendicitis in pregnancy: diagnosis, management and complications. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999, 78:758-762.
32. Gjelsteen A.C., Ching B.H., Meyermann M.W., et al. CT, MRI, PET/CT, and ultrasound in the evaluation of obstetric and gynecologic patients. Surg Clin North Am 2008, 88:361-390.
33. Freeland M., King E., Safcsak K., et al. Diagnosis of appendicitis in pregnancy. Am J Surg 2009, 198:753-758.
34. McGory M.L., Zingmond D.S., Tillou A., et al. Negative appendectomy in pregnant women is associated with a substantial risk of fetal loss. J Am Coll Surg 2007, 205:534-540.
35. Pedrosa I., Levine D., Eyvazzadeh A.D., et al. MR imaging evaluation of acute appendicitis in pregnancy. Radiology 2006, 238:891-899.
36. Lam M., Singh A., Kaewlai R., et al. Magnetic resonance of acute appendicitis: pearls and pitfalls. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2008, 37:57-66.
37. Pickuth D., Heywang-Kobrunner S.H., Spielmann R.P. Suspected acute appendicitis: is ultrasonography or computed tomography the preferred imaging technique?. Eur J Surg 2000, 166:315-319.
38. Horrow M.M., White D.S., Horrow J.C. Differentiation of perforated from nonperforated appendicitis at CT. Radiology 2003, 227:46-51.
39. Bixby S.D., Lucey B.C., Soto J.A., et al. Perforated versus nonperforated acute appendicitis: accuracy of multidetector CT detection. Radiology 2006, 241:780-786.
40. Tsuboi M., Takase K., Kaneda I., et al. Perforated and nonperforated appendicitis: defect in enhancing appendiceal wall-depiction with multi-detector row CT. Radiology 2008, 246:142-147.
41. Hoeffel C., Crema M.D., Belkacem A., et al. Multi-detector row CT: spectrum of disease involving the ileocecal area. Radiographics 2006, 26:1373-1390.
42. McCarville M.B. Evaluation of typhlitis in children: CT versus US. Pediatr Radiol 2006, 36:890-891.
43. Yu J., Fulcher A.S., Turner M.A., et al. Helical CT evaluation of acute right lower quadrant pain: part II, uncommon mimics of appendicitis. AJR 2005, 184:1143-1149.