Enteral contrast in the computed tomography diagnosis of appendicitis comparative effectiveness in a prospective surgical cohort

Annals of Surgery

Volumn 260, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 311-316

  Drake, Frederick Thurston ^a,b   Alfonso, Rafael ^a,b   Bhargava, Puneet ^b   Cuevas, Carlos ^b   Dighe, Manjiri K ^b   Florence, Michael G ^c   Johnson, Morris G ^e   Jurkovich, Gregory J ^f   Steele, Scott R ^g   Symons, Rebecca Gaston ^b   Thirlby, Richard C ^d   Flum, David R ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^c SWEDISH MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d VIRGINIA MASON MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery   (United States)

^f DENVER HEALTH MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^g MADIGAN ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Appendicitis; Comparative effectiveness; Computed tomography; Diagnosis; Enteral contrast; Oral contrast

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ADULT; APPENDECTOMY; APPENDICITIS; APPENDIX PERFORATION; ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RURAL AREA; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; URBAN AREA; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC USE; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; APPENDECTOMY; APPENDICITIS; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84905459624     PISSN: 00034932     EISSN: 15281140     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000272     Document Type: Article

References (33)

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. Addiss DG, Shaffer N, Fowler BS, et al. The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol. 1990;132:910-925.
3. Cantrell JR, Stafford ES. The diminishing mortality from appendicitis. Ann Surg. 1955;141:749-758.
4. Walker S, Haun W, Clark J, et al. The value of limited computed tomography with rectal contrast in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Am J Surg. 2000;180:450-454; discussion 454-455.
5. 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.
6. Lee CC, Golub R, Singer AJ, et al. Routine versus selective abdominal computed tomography scan in the evaluation of right lower quadrant pain: a randomized controlled trial. Acad Emerg Med. 2007;14:117-122.
7. Kim K, Rhee JE, Lee CC, et al. Impact of helical computed tomography in clinically evident appendicitis. Emerg Med J. 2008;25:477-481.
8. Piper HG, Rusnak C, Orrom W, et al. Current management of appendicitis at a community center-how can we improve? Am J Surg. 2008;195:585-588; discussion 588-589.
9. Wagner PL, Eachempati SR, Soe K, et al. Defining the current negative appendectomy rate: for whom is preoperative computed tomography making an impact? Surgery. 2008;144:276-282.
10. Raja AS, Wright C, Sodickson AD, et al. Negative appendectomy rate in the era of CT: an 18-year perspective. Radiology. 2010;256:460-465.
11. Webb EM, Nguyen A, Wang ZJ, et al. The negative appendectomy rate: who benefits from preoperative CT? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197:861-866.
12. Drake FT, Florence MG, Johnson MG, et al. Progress in the diagnosis of appendicitis: a report from Washington State's Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program. Ann Surg. 2012;256:586-594.
13. Dalrymple NC, Prasad SR, El-Merhi FM, et al. Price of isotropy in multidetector CT. Radiographics. 2007;27:49-62.
14. Lee SY, Coughlin B, Wolfe JM, et al. Prospective comparison of helical CT of the abdomen and pelvis without and with oral contrast in assessing acute abdominal pain in adult emergency department patients. Emerg Radiol. 2006;12:150-157.
15. Kepner AM, Bacasnot JV, Stahlman BA. Intravenous contrast alone vs intravenous and oral contrast computed tomography for the diagnosis of appendicitis in adult ED patients. Am J Emerg Med. 2012;30:1765-1773.
16. Anderson SW, Soto JA, Lucey BC, et al. Abdominal 64-MDCT for suspected appendicitis: the use of oral and IV contrast material versus IV contrast material only. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:1282-1288.
17. Keyzer C, Cullus P, Tack D, et al. MDCT for suspected acute appendicitis in adults: impact of oral and IV contrast media at standard-dose and simulated low-dose techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:1272-1281.
18. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370:1453-1457.
19. Flum DR, McClure TD, Morris A, et al. Misdiagnosis of appendicitis and the use of diagnostic imaging. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201:933-939.
20. Huynh V, Lalezarzadeh F, Lawandy S, et al. Abdominal computed tomography in the evaluation of acute and perforated appendicitis in the community setting. Am Surg. 2007;73:1002-1005.
21. Frei SP, Bond WF, Bazuro RK, et al. Appendicitis outcomes with increasing computed tomographic scanning. Am J Emerg Med. 2008;26:39-44.
22. Mun S, Ernst RD, Chen K, et al. Rapid CT diagnosis of acute appendicitis with IV contrast material. Emerg Radiol. 2006;12:99-102.
23. Poortman P, Oostvogel HJ, Bosma E, et al. Improving diagnosis of acute appendicitis: results of a diagnostic pathwaywith standard use of ultrasonography followed by selective use of CT. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208:434-441.
24. Laituri CA, Fraser JD, Aguayo P, et al. The lack of efficacy for oral contrast in the diagnosis of appendicitis by computed tomography. J Surg Res. 2011;170:100-103.
25. Winter T. A plea for oral contrast administration in CT for emergency department patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195:W90.
26. Trulzsch DV, Penmetsa A, Karim A, et al. Gastrografin-induced aspiration pneumonia: a lethal complication of computed tomography. South Med J. 1992;85:1255-1256.
27. Morcos SK. Review article: effects of radiographic contrast media on the lung. Br J Radiol. 2003;76:290-295.
28. Mahmoud M, McAuliffe J, Kim HY, et al. Oral contrast for abdominal computed tomography in children: the effects on gastric fluid volume. Anesth Analg. 2010;111:1252-1258.
29. Anderson BA, Salem L, Flum DR. Asystematic reviewofwhether oral contrast is necessary for the computed tomography diagnosis of appendicitis in adults.. Am J Surg. 2005;190:474-478.
30. Malone AJ, Jr, Wolf CR, Malmed AS, et al. Diagnosis of acute appendicitis: value of unenhanced CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993;160:763-766.
31. Lane MJ, Liu DM, Huynh MD, et al. Suspected acute appendicitis: nonenhanced helical CT in 300 consecutive patients. Radiology. 1999;213:341-346.
32. Lowe LH, Penney MW, Stein SM, et al. Unenhanced limitedCT of the abdomen in the diagnosis of appendicitis in children: comparison with sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176:31-35.
33. Hemmila MR, Birkmeyer NJ, Arbabi S, et al. Introduction to propensity scores: a case study on the comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic vs open appendectomy. Arch Surg. 2010;145:939-945.