Prospective Comparison of the Efficacy of Two Common Appendicitis Scoring Systems: Is Combination a Solution?
Journal Title: Turkish Journal of Colorectal Disease - Year 2020, Vol 30, Issue 2
Abstract
Aim: The diagnosis of acute appendicitis mostly relies on history taking and physical examination findings supported by laboratory and imaging studies. A number of different diagnostic scoring systems have been developed to facilitate diagnosis, and their accuracies vary among patient populations. This prospective study aims to evaluate the accuracy of the two most frequently used scoring systems in the Turkish patient population and to analyse the possible diagnostic advantage of using these two systems in combination. Method: Patients admitted to the emergency department of a tertiary healthcare centre with acute abdominal pain who eventually underwent appendectomy between July 2018 and January 2019 were enrolled in the study. Alvarado and Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) scores, as well as other laboratory parameters, were recorded for each patient. Using histopathologic examination as the gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of each scoring system were calculated and combined using McNemar’s x2 test. Results: Data from a total of 203 patients were analysed. The sensitivity of the RIPASA system (95%) was far superior to that of the Alvarado system (35.6%). However, the Alvarado scoring system had much higher diagnostic specificity than the RIPASA system (80% vs 33.3%). The combined sensitivity and specificity of the tests rose to 88% and 62.5%, respectively. Conclusion: The RIPASA system has high sensitivity; however, the Alvarado system has high specificity for the Turkish population. Both the Alvarado and RIPASA scoring systems are useful clinical tools with different strengths. Using these two systems in combination increases diagnostic power by combining the strongest aspects of both tests.
Authors and Affiliations
Mehmet Üstün, Avni Can Karaca, Semra Demirli Atıcı, Göksever Akpınar, Cem Karaali
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP684935
- DOI 10.4274/tjcd.galenos.2020.2020-1-6
- Views 163
- Downloads 0
Evaluation of Etiological Risk Factors in the Development of Adult Chronic Pilonidal Disease
Aim: Pilonidal disease has a high rate of recurrence after surgical interventions and measures that can be taken to prevent the recurrence are gaining importance. This study was planned to review the possible risk factor...
Pelvic Exenteration for Recurrent Rectal Cancer: A Single Institution Experience
Aim: Rectal cancer is an important cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide (1-2). Although rectal cancers can be diagnosed earlier nowadays due to the development of screening programmes, 18% of patients have a locally...
Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: A Review of Anatomy and Surgical Techniques, Oncologic and Functional Outcomes and the Role of Robotics
Intersphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer is a relatively novel anal-sparing technique that requires a thorough knowledge of the anatomy of the deep pelvic space and advanced surgical skills. The development...
Our Surgical Experience and Clinical Results in Nontraumatic Small Bowel Perforations
Aim: In this study, we aimed to share our surgical experiences and clinical results in non-traumatic small bowel perforations. Method: Patients who underwent surgical treatment for non-traumatic small bowel perforation...
Surgical and Early Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Rectal Surgery: A Comparative Study
Aim: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the short-term clinicopathological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery in patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery. Method: Between May 2015 and July 2017, 46 patients...