Role of Multi-Detector Computed Tomography in Assessing Anatomical Site Variation of Appendix in Patients with Appendicitis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5457/ams.v55i1.816Keywords:
MDCT, Acute appendicitis, Diagnostic accuracy, White blood cells, radiologyAbstract
Introduction: The appendix is a blind-ended tubular structure arising from the cecum with diameter of less than 6 mm. Acute appendicitis (AA) is considered as a common disease in young patients and may occur in any age. The use of biochemical markers and urine analysis may lack specificity for AA diagnosis. Thus, the aim is to assess the feasibility of multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) in diagnosing and differentiating kinds of appendicitis.
Methods: 121 consecutive patients (8.30% female, 91.70% male), with a mean age of 23.86 ± 10.86 years who were operated on for the suspicion of AA, were included in this study. Recruited patients were classified as false negative (FN) group and true positive (TP) group based on lab result and both clinical decision, symptoms and MDCT findings. Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare whether there is a difference in the dependent variable for two independent groups (FN and TP). A two-sided p-value > 0.05 was considered significant.
Results: There was a statistical difference has been observed between the FN and TP groups (p=0.005) with respect to white blood (WBC) counts. However, those groups were not statistically different from each other (p=0.16) as a function of appendix diameter. There was a linear relation between WBC counts and appendix diameter > 10 mm.
Conclusion: MDCT is highly accurate in diagnosing acute appendicitis. US is a “first-pass” recommended approach in diagnosing acute appendicitis. Appendix diameter greater than 10 mm is linearly correlated with white blood cell counts.
References
Mostbeck, G. et al. How to diagnose acute appendicitis: ultrasound first. Insights Imaging 7, 255–263 (2016).
Huang, T.-H., Huang, Y. C. & Tu, C.-W. Acute appendicitis or not: Facts and suggestions to reduce valueless surgery. (2013) doi:10.1016/j.jacme.2013.10.003.
Humes, D. J. & Simpson, J. Acute appendicitis. BMJ 333, 530–534 (2006).
Weyant, M. J. et al. Interpretation of computed tomography does not correlate with laboratory or pathologic findings in surgically confirmed acute appendicitis. Surgery 128, 145–152 (2000).
Shogilev, D. J., Duus, N., Odom, S. R. & Shapiro, N. I. Diagnosing Appendicitis: Evidence-Based Review of the Diagnostic Approach in 2014. West. J. Emerg. Med. 15, 859 (2014).
Lee, S. L. et al. Computed Tomography and Ultrasonography Do Not Improve and May Delay the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Appendicitis. Arch. Surg. 136, 556–562 (2001).
Tzanakis, N. E. et al. A new approach to accurate diagnosis of acute appendicitis. World J. Surg. 29, 1151–1156 (2005).
Amalesh, T., Shankar, M. & Shankar, R. CRP in Acute Appendicitis — Is It a Necessary Investigation? Int. J. Surg. 2, 88–89 (2004).
Fawkner-Corbett, D. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of blood tests of inflammation in paediatric appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 12, e056854 (2022).
Giljaca, V., Nadarevic, T., Poropat, G., Nadarevic, V. S. & Stimac, D. Diagnostic Accuracy of Abdominal Ultrasound for Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. World J. Surg. 41, 693–700 (2017).
Kim, H. Y. et al. CT in Differentiating Complicated From Uncomplicated Appendicitis: Presence of Any of 10 CT Features Versus Radiologists’ Gestalt Assessment. AJR. Am. J. Roentgenol. 213, W218–W227 (2019).
Pickhardt, P. J., Lawrence, E. M., Pooler, B. D. & Bruce, R. J. Diagnostic performance of multidetector computed tomography for suspected acute appendicitis. Ann. Intern. Med. 154, 789–796 (2011).
Randen, A. et al. Acute Appendicitis: Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance of CT and Graded Compression US Related to Prevalence of Disease1. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2483071652 249, 97–106 (2008).
Kave, M., Parooie, F. & Salarzaei, M. Pregnancy and appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the clinical use of MRI in diagnosis of appendicitis in pregnant women. World J. Emerg. Surg. 14, 1–14 (2019).
Figueiro Longo, M. G., Jaimes, C., Machado, F., Delgado, J. & Gee, M. S. Pediatric Emergency MRI. Magn. Reson. Imaging Clin. N. Am. 30, 533–552 (2022).
Benjaminov, O., Atri, M., Hamilton, P. & Rappaport, D. Frequency of Visualization and Thickness of Normal Appendix at Nonenhanced Helical CT1. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2252011551 225, 400–406 (2002).
De Jesús, O., Espejo, A., Moreno Mejía, M. E., Heber, L. & Guerrero, U. Review Articles Acute Appendicitis: imAging findings And current ApproAch to diAgnostic imAges Apendicitis AgudA: hAllAzgos rAdiológicos y enfoque ActuAl de lAs imágenes diAgnósticAs.
Kim, H. C. et al. Acute appendicitis: relationships between CT-determined severities and serum white blood cell counts and C-reactive protein levels. Br. J. Radiol. 84, 1115 (2011).
Er, S., Çomçal?, B., Soykurt, A., Yüksel, B. C. & Tez, M. Diagnosis of Appendicitis in Patients with a Normal White Blood Cell Count; A Cross-Sectional Study. Bull. Emerg. Trauma 6, 128 (2018).
Burak, K. et al. The effect of appendix diameter on perforation in acute appendicitis cases Akut apandisit olgular?nda apandiks çap?n?n perforasyona etkisi. 392–397 (2019) doi:10.7197/223.vi.567892.
Bain, B. J. Guide., Blood cells: a practical guide. John Wiley Sons (2021).
Haentjens, L., Coussement, L. & Vuylsteke, M. Value of ultrasound and computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis with histopathology as gold standard. https://doi.org/10.1080/00015458.2022.2136050 (2022) doi:10.1080/00015458.2022.2136050.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright transfer
The listed authors warrant that they are the authors and sole owners of the submitted manuscript. The authors also warrant that the work is original; that it has not been previously published in print or electronic format and is not under consideration by another publisher or electronic medium; that it has not been previously transferred, assigned, or otherwise encumbered; and that the authors have full power to grant such rights. With respect to the results of this work, the manuscript of this or substantially similar content will not be submitted to any other journal until the review process in the Acta Medica Salinianana has been officially completed (acceptance or rejection of the manuscript). The paper will not be withdrawn from the review process by the Acta Medica Saliniana Editorial Board until the review process is completed. The authors will comply with the requests of the Acta Medica Saliniana Editors and reviewers to improve the paper for publication. The eventual disagreements will be submitted in a written form; the authors are aware that the disagreement(s) with the Acta Medica Saliniana requests may result in the rejection of the manuscript. The authors hereby grant to the Acta Medica Saliniana the right to edit, revise, abridge, and condense the manuscript. If the manuscript is accepted for publication in the Acta Medica Saliniana, the authors hereby transfer the copyright of the paper to the Acta Medica Saliniana. The authors permit the Acta Medica Saliniana to allow third parties to copy any part of the journal without asking for permission, provided that the reference to the source is given. For papers with more than one author: All other co-authors agree to allow the corresponding author to make decisions regarding prepublication release of the information in the paper to the media, federal agencies, or both.
