| P.O.Box 2345, Beijing 100023,China | World J Gastroenterol 2002 October 15;8(5):947-951 |
| Email: wcjd@public.bta.net.cn | WJG ISSN 1007-9327 CN 14-1219/ R |
| http:// www.wjgnet.com | Copyright © 2002 by The WJG Press |
Abdominal pain among children re-evaluation of a diagnostic algorithm
Hong Zhou, Yi-Chen Chen, Jin-Zhe Zhang
Hong Zhou, Yi-Chen Chen,
Jin-Zhe Zhang, Department of
Pediatric Surgery, Beijing Children's Hospital, Affiliated to Capital University
of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100045, China
Correspondence to:
Dr. Hong Zhou, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Beijing Children's Hospital, 56
Nan Lishi Road, Beijing 100045, China. hzhou@163bj.com
Telephone: +86-10-68028401
Fax: +86-10-68011503
Received
2001-08-08 Accepted 2001-08-28
Abstract
AIM: To re-evaluate the algorithm that
has been used for over 40 years for diagnosis of acute abdominal pain among
children.
METHODS: Among the 937 cases admitted to
the surgical emergency ward in 2000, 656 cases of acute appendicitis were
studied to evaluate the usefulness of the present algorithm for its calculated
accuracy, false positive and false negative rates, the sensitivity and
specificity in the instant diagnosis of various types of acute appendicitis in
different age groups. The algorithm used was established in 1958 and revised for
this study in 1999. It includes a 3-step analysis of clinical presentations,
i.e.: firstly, a diagnosis of surgical pain by definite organic abdominal signs;
then a diagnosis of the subgroup of surgical condition by special signs; and
finally the diagnosis of the present disease by specific signs. A footnote
describes a "comparative technique" of abdominal examination in
non-cooperative children.
RESULTS: The general accuracy of
diagnosis was 92.8 %, overall mortality 0.1 % among 973 cases of abdominal pain
in 2000. 373 attending surgeons and 241 residents including trainees joined the
diagnosis and treatment with no remarkable difference in the results. The
incidence of acute appendicitis, 656 in 973 cases, was 67.4 % representing the
majority of abdominal pain. In the series of 656 cases, the accuracy of
diagnosis of acute appendicitis was 93.6 %, false positive 6.4 %, false negative
0.9 %, sensitivity at first visit 82.7 %, specificity for appendicitis 98.0 %,
no death or documentary complication.
CONCLUSION: The present algorithm used
for diagnosis of acute abdominal pain is effective and preferable in reducing
misdiagnosis and maltreatment at emergency. The use of some modern technology
should be further explored.
Zhou H, Chen YC, Zhang JZ. Abdominal pain among children re-evaluation of a
diagnostic algorithm.
World J Gastroenterol 2002; 8(5): 947-951
INTRODUCTION
In recent literature, the incidence of
perforated appendicitis seems to be rising, and most of the late cases are due
to misdiagnosis[1-3]. In China, we have not yet had the similar poor
impression[4]. For many years,we've achieved good results in the
management of acute abdomen in pediatric surgery[5]. The best results
as reported by Beijing Children's Hospital
(BCH) are: no death in 20 years in 10 000 consecutive cases of acute
appendicitis[6], no death in 3 years in 100 consecutive cases of
strangulated intestinal obstruction including all those cases that came in shock
state[7], and over 90 % of cases of early intussusception that were
reduced without emergency surgery even in county hospitals[8,9]. In
1958, a systematical analysis method, the algorithm, for diagnosis of acute
abdominal pain among children was published[10]. and popularized in
many places of China. It has been generally followed, with timely revisions, for
over 40 years. However, with the rapid progress of the modern diagnostic tools
in recent years, it is necessary to have a re-evaluation of the above mentioned
diagnostic algorithm for abdominal pain among children and try to find out some
reasonable modern technology to make it further improved and popularized.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This is a prospective
study of the diagnostic algorithm, which was established in 1958. With the
improvement of medical sciences, and changes in the incidence of common diseases
in pediatric surgical emergency clinic, the algorithm has been revised many
times. Generally, for over 40 years, it has been proved helpful in the diagnosis
of acute abdomen of children. For this study, the algorithm was revised again in
1999 as shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Algorithm for diagnosis of
abdominal pain
| Abdominal Pain | ||
| Acute abdomen | Non-acute abdomen | |
| (long time pain definite signs) | (short pain no definite sign) | |
| 1 Focal inflammation | 2 Intestinal obstruction | 1 Primary enterospasm |
| (allergic,idiopathic) | ||
| (1)local tenderness | (1)intestinal pattern | (1)weaning colic |
| (appendicitis, etc.) | (adhesive obstruction) | |
| (2)tender mass | (2)movable mass | (2)school-boy colic |
| (torsion ovarian cyst) | (intussusception) | |
| 3 generalized peritonitis | 2 secondary enterospasm | |
| (full and silent abdomen) | (organic, non-acute) | |
| (1)spreading peritonitis | (2)gangrenous peritonitis | (1) chronic G-I ulcers |
| (inflamed organ) | (strangulation) | (2) pancreticobiliary colic |
| (3)perforating peritonitis | (4)primary peritonitis | (3) chronic gastritis |
| (peptic ulcer, typhoid) | (bacteremia,vaginitis) | (4) cerebrospinal colic |
| (5) hemo-vascular disease | ||
| (6) metabolic disease | ||
| (7) auto-immue disorder | ||
| (8) intoxication |
*Footnote: (1) "comparative
technique" of abdominal palpation, watching different reaction of the child
on different part of abdomen. (2) "dynamic comparison" of clinical
presentation, is today better or worse than yesterday?
It consists of a 3-step analysis of clinical
presentations. The first step is to make the diagnosis of a surgical abdomen by
finding definite abdominal signs indicating organic lesion, i.e. tenderness,
spasm, intestinal pattern and mass. The second step is to make the diagnosis of
the subgroup of surgical abdomen, namely organ inflammation, intestinal
obstruction and generalized peritonitis by their special signs respectively. The
third step is to make the diagnosis of the present disease, like acute
appendicitis or intussusception by their specific cardinal signs. In the
footnote, the "comparative technique" of abdominal examination for
non-cooperative children and its "comparative dynamic evaluation" are
described.
Strictly following the above algorithm, 973 cases
of acute abdominal pain admitted to the surgical emergency ward of BCH in 2000
(Table 2) were reviewed. The overall rate of misdiagnosis and a general status
of the diagnosis and result of treatment were studied (Table 3). In order to
make a differential evaluation, 614 cases of acute appendicitis which is the
representative disease occupying 68.0 % in 2000 (Table 4) were investigated in
detail. The accuracy of diagnosis, the false positives, false negatives, the
sensitivity and the specificity of the use of the diagnostic algorithm were
calculated accordingly. Different-level doctors concerned in making diagnosis
were also recorded.
Table 2 Came with abdominal pain to
emergency ward, BCH, 2000
| Category | n | % |
| Organ inflammationa | 637 | 65.5 |
| Intestinal obstructionb | 160 | 16.5 |
| Traumatic abdomen | 28 | 2.9 |
| GI hemorrhage | 38 | 3.9 |
| Primary peritonitis | 5 | 0.5 |
| Perforation peritonitis | 8 | 0.8 |
| Tumor twisting or rupturing | 14 | 1.4 |
| Torsion testes or appendage | 8 | 0.8 |
| Other organic lesion | 5 | 0.5 |
| Non organic pain | 70 | 7.2 |
| Total | 973 | 100.0 |
a Included 614
appendicitis b Included 57 intussusception
Table 3 Outcome of 973 cases of acute
abdominal pain admitted to surgical emergency ward in 2000
| Outcome | n | % |
| Cure | 894 | 91.9 |
| Improveda | 67 | 6.9 |
| Unimproveda | 11 | 1.1 |
| Died | 1 | 0.1 |
| Total | 973 | 100.0 |
aMost are chronic
traumatic, inflammatory, and malignancy cases with acute pain
Table 4 Number of operated patients of
common surgical abdomen, 2000
| Disease | n | % |
| Acute appendicitis | 614 | 68.0 |
| Intussusceptiona | 57 | 6.3 |
| Incarcerated hernia | 45 | 5.0 |
| Traumatic abdomen | 28 | 3.1 |
| Adhesive obstruction | 25 | 2.8 |
| Fecalith obstruction | 19 | 2.1 |
| Miscellaneous | 115 | 12.7 |
| Total | 903 | 100.0 |
aThe other 90 % of
early cases cured in OPD by rectal insufflation
RESULTS
Among 973 cases in 2000, the overall
mortality was 0.1 %. It was a boy aged 6 yr, who died of strangulation
perforation of stomach in uncontrolled Crohn's disease.
There was still no death of acute appendicitis. The general accuracy of
diagnosis of acute abdomen was 94.5 %. Concerning the 656 cases of acute
appendicitis in 2000, the following figures were calculated: Diagnosis at
discharge (614)/Diagnosis on admission (656)=93.6 % overall accuracy;
Non-surgical abdomen (42)/Appendicitis admitted (656)=6.4 % false positive at
admission; Admission after 2nd visit (196)/ Appendicitis admitted (656)=29.9 %
false negative at the 1st visit, mostly delayed in other hospital due to
transfer; Second visits in BCH surgery (6)/Appendicitis admitted (656)=0.9 %
false negative BCH; Admitted by 1st visit (258)/Appendicitis in 24 h (312)=82.7
% sensitivity (It means, 82.7 % of early appendicitis within 24 h can be
diagnosed at first visit); Proved appendicitis (542)/Cases operated (553)=98.0 %
specificity (It means, 98.0 % of appendicitis can be differentiated from other
surgical conditions); Ratio between cases diagnosed at first visit by surgeons
of high level and low level=373:241 cases (in BCH, surgeons under 3 years of
training are not allowed to manage on-call emergency); Acute appendicitis
(656)/Abdominal pain (973)=67.4 % incidence at admission. There was no
mortality, no documentary complication, but 5 perforated cases in moderate
postoperative morbidity. Pathology of 614 case of acute appendicitis in 2000 is
shown in Table 5.
Table 5 Pathology of 614 cases of
operated appendicitis (2000)
| Pathology | Simple | Suppurative | Gangrenous | Perforative | Recurrent | Abscess | Infiltrative | Total |
| Cases | 166 | 254 | 7 | 103 | 38 | 42a | 4 | 614 |
| % | 27.0 | 41.4 | 1.1 | 16.8 | 6.2 | 6.8 | 0.7 | 100.0 |
aSimple drainage only
DISCUSSION
Theoretic basis of the diagnostic
algorithm
Because the basic pathology of
surgical conditions must be an organic lesion inside the abdomen, the chief
symptoms and signs must be persistent and definite[11]. Acute pain
shorter than 6 hours is hard to rule out from the more common abdominal pain due
to functional intestinal spasm unless some specific abdominal signs are found[12,13].
By the term "definite" it means definite pain, definite location and
definite area involved. Therefore, the child has to be examined many times in an
appropriate period of time. In BCH, people usually do the 1st time examination
at the first visit, the 2nd examination after laboratory tests, and the 3rd
repeat of examination before sending the patient to the ward or back home. Full
agreement of the positive findings in the 3 examinations will make the final
diagnosis. If negative sign appears in any one examination, further observation
and re-examination should be made. The common positive abdominal signs
indicating surgical condition are local tenderness, muscular spasm, palpable
intestinal pattern and mass. By a soft flat abdomen without the above mentioned
signs, people can rule out acute surgical abdomen.
According to common presentations of surgical abdomen, it can be classified into
3 sub-groups: (1) Definite local tenderness and spasm usually indicate a focal
inflammation. (2) A palpable distended intestinal loop or a movable solid
sausage mass indicates intestinal obstruction. (3) A resistant and silent
abdomen indicates generalized peritonitis. These practically cover up all common
diseases seen in children. (1) In the sub-group of focal inflammation, the
diagnosis depends on the location of tenderness, e.g. in RLQ of abdomen which is
usually acute appendicitis; pelvic rectal tenderness with mass is usually
torsion of ovarian tumor; flank tenderness is usually renal colic or
perinephretic abscess; (2) In the sub-group of intestinal obstruction, a
distended intestinal pattern indicates extraluminal obstruction of intestine,
e.g. adhesional strangulation, or a solid mass usually indicates intraluminal
obstruction, e.g. intussusception or ascaris bezoar; (3) In the sub-group of
generalized peritonitis: a marked tender point indicates the focus of spreading
peritonitis, e.g. perforated appendicitis; a palpable loop or mass indicates
gangrenous peritonitis, e.g. strangulated intestinal obstruction.
Pneumoperitoneum by percussion or X-ray indicates perforating peritonitis, e.g.
peptic ulcer perforation; thin pus by abdominal puncture aspiration indicates
most probably primary peritonitis.
After 3-step analysis, the final diagnosis of a
surgical disease is usually made. And then, a comparison between the cardinal
signs of the disease and the signs found in this particular patient should be
made as a feed-back checking. Any disagreement must be carefully investigated or
the diagnosis be reconsidered otherwise.
Method of abdominal assessment in non-cooperative children
Examination of abdomen needs
cooperation of the patient. Answering tenderness must be accurate. A crying kid
always makes the palpation confused. Even the school-boy may not be able to give
an accurate answer to abdominal examination. So the surgeon has to try all means
to search for cooperation of a bigger child and to evaluate the findings
carefully by repeated examinations. At the same time, he has to observe every
action of the kid carefully. Quick squatting or jumping up and down from the
examination table without hesitation may rule out abdominal tenderness[14].
For examination of crying kids, a 3-step "comparative technique" of
abdominal palpation has been practiced satisfactory in BCH. (1) The 1st step:
the mother stands by the head to beguile the baby and hold both its hands. The
surgeon stands by the right side of the examination table and palpates the
abdomen from LLQ, LUQ, RUQ to RLQ subsequently. Carefully watching the reaction
of baby, a high pitch crying might be the answer of tenderness. (2) The 2nd
step: let baby's left
hand free, surgeon presses the abdomen with two hands on RLQ and LLQ. Baby
naturally uses his free hand to push away the hand in the tender point, e.g. RLQ.
(3) The 3rd step: surgeon makes a finger press at the tender area, e.g. McBurney抯
point. Baby will try all means to get rid of
the finger. By this time, the surgeon may press all other parts of abdomen, to
make sure no tenderness beside McBurney's point
or elsewhere.
By the same way, surgeon's two hands press on both sides of the baby's abdomen.
After several cryings, people may find the hand on left side having pressed much
deeper than that on the right side if there is spasm in RLQ of abdomen.
In difficult cases, a
dose of short action sedative can be used, e.g. 10 % choral hydrate by dose 1
ml/mos of age. This is limited only to the last examination. Under sedation,
deep palpation in six parts (4 quadrants, periumbilical and pelvis) can be made.
In order to feel the deep structures in abdomen, the abdominal aorta or other
landmarks of posterior abdominal wall should be reached. In rectal pelvic
bimanual examination, infiltration or abscess of peri-appendiceal structure can
be felt in right iliac fossa and incarcerated inguinal hernia can be felt at the
middle along the inguinal ligament from interior by the endo-rectal examination
finger[15,16]. It must be kept in mind that the pathology of an acute
abdomen is continuously changing. Therefore dynamic comparative observation and
evaluation are essential. For making an instant diagnosis in emergency clinic,
the information from mother's impression about baby's appetite and general
activity, whether today is better or worse than yesterday, will be very helpful
in making decision of emergency surgery[17].
Supplementary diagnostic techniques (Table 5)
By quick plane X-ray film of erect
position, especially in suspected intestinal obstruction, preferably with low
pressure barium enema, perforating peritonitis, intestinal obstruction and
intussusception can be well demonstrated (Figure 1, 2)[18]. By
ultrasound, acute appendicitis and abscess, intussusception, peritoncal fluid,
and ovarian cyst or tumor, and perinephretic lesions may be demonstrated (Figure
3, 4)[19-32]. By paracentesis, the abdominal puncture fluid may tell
the peritonitis, strangulation of intestine, perforation of intestine or gall
bladder[33,34]. Bloody aspirate always calls for an immediate
surgical exploration. In case of fine needle puncture getting into intestine
under pressure, don't hurry,
keeping on aspiration until negative pressure will prevent intestinal leakage
after withdrawal of needle. CT, MRI, Scintiscanning and other fantastic modern
tools are used only occasionally[35-38]. But dramatic improvement of
the diagnosis of acute abdomen in children must depend on further exploration
for the use of high technology. e.g. laparoscopy and portable ultrasound
computerized[39-44].
Table 6 Confirmatory diagnostic method
used in 973 admissions, 2000
| Diagnostic method | n | % |
| Physical exam | 630 | 64.7 |
| Paracentesisa | 58 | 6.0 |
| Imaging | 285 | 29.3 |
| Plane film | 93 | |
| Rectal insufflationb | 48 | |
| Barium enema | 8 | |
| Barium meala | 33 | |
| Sonography | 90 | |
| Tc99scintiscana | 13 | |
| Total | 973 | 100.0 |
aAfter admission
bReduction failed cases in O.P.D.
Figure 1 Small empty colon
Figure 2 Pneumoperitoneum
Figure 3
Appendiceal abscess
Figure 4 Intussusception-target sign
We conclude that the algorithm has been used and
accepted for more than 40 years in thousands of patients by hundreds of surgeons
of different levels. It proves helpful in handling acute abdominal pain among
children. The prospective study of appendicitis in 2000, has proved its
accuracy, false positive, false negative, specificity and sensitivity, all being
of acceptable value. However, there are still doubtful cases needing
observation, especially in cases with 6 hrs duration without definite signs,
partial intestinal obstruction without toxic reactions, and late appendicitis
may not need operation. Besides, in the other half of the algorithm (Table1),
non-surgical abdominal pain, it includes a large number of diseases needing
systemic examination and investigation. However none of them need immediate
surgical operation. The most common "school-boy colic" (or primary
intestinal spasm) characterized by short pain in attacks, normal appetite and
activities in intervals, repeated attacks for months without impairment of
nutrition or growth occupies about 60 % of school-boy abdominal pain. Keep this
in mind, and it may reduce the false positive diagnosis of acute abdomen.
PROSPECTIVE TECHNOLOGY
(1)Since this algorithm
is simple and regular, it can be put into a software of computer to up-grade it
into high technology; (2)Portable ultrasonography machine to be used on
emergencies examination table could take place of manual palpation of abdomen
for uncooperative kids, making the examination more objective; (3)Further
improvement of laparoscopy, exploratory laparotomy in acute abdominal pain may
be unnecessary.
REFERENCES
1 Krasna IH.
Abdominal pain and appendicitis: Is there a difference in referrals between HMO
pediatricians and private
pediatricians. J Pediatr Surg 2000; 35:
1084-1086
2 Rothrock SG, Pagane J. Acute appendicitis in
children: emergency department diagnosis and management. Ann Emerg Med
2000; 36: 39-51
3 Gofrit ON, Abu-Dalu K. Perforated appendicitis in the
child: contemporary experience. Isr Med Assoc J 2001; 3:262-265
4 Zhang JZ. Digestive surgery in Chinese children. Shijie
Huaren Xiaohua Zazhi 2000; 8: 489-490
5 Zhang JZ. Treatment of acute appendicitis in children
with combined traditional Chinese and western medicine.
Zhonghua Yixue Zazhi 1977; 3: 373-378
6 Zhang JZ, Xie XY. A 20-year review of acute
appendicitis in children. Zhonghua Xiaoer Waike Zazhi 1987; 8:
149-151
7 Zhou H, Zhang JZ. Enterectomy, exteriorization of
intestine and delayed entero-anastomosis for intestinal necrosis in children.
Zhonghua Xiaoer Waike Zazhi 1992; 13:
323-324
8 Guo JZ, Ma XY, Zhou QH. Results of air pressure enema
reduction of intussusception: 6,396 cases in 13 years.
J Pediatr Surg 1986; 21: 1201-1203
9 Zhou H, Zhang JZ. Rectal insufflation reduction of
intussusception: further improvement on the basis of spasm theory. Asian J
Surg 1999; 22: 136-141
10 Zhang JZ. Diagnosis and treatment of acute abdomen in pediatric
surgery. Zhonghua Waike Zazhi 1958; 6: 890-894
11 Wade S, Kilgour T. Extracts from 揷linical
evidence? infantile colic. BMJ 2001; 25: 437-440
12 Rasquin-Weber A, Hyman PE, Cucchiara S, Fleisher DR, Hyams JS,
Milla PJ, Staiano A. Childhood functional gastrointestinal
disorders.
Gut 1999; 45: 1160-1168
13 Riddell A, Carr SB. Recurrent abdominal pain in childhood. Practitioner
2000; 244: 346-350
14 Irish MS, Pearl PH, Caty MG, Glick PL. The approach to common
abdominal diagnoses in infants and children. Pediat Clin Nor
Amer
1998; 45: 729-771
15 Scholer SJ, Pituch K, Orr DP, Dittus RS. Use of the rectal
examination on children with acute abdominal pain.
Clin
Pediatr 1998; 37: 311-316
16 Jesudason EC, Walker J. Rectal examination in paediatric
surgical practice. Brit J Surg 1999; 86: 376-378
17 Bachoo P, Mahomed AA, Ninan GK, Youngson GG. Acute appendicitis:
the continuing role for observation.
Pediatr
Surg Int 2001; 17: 125-128
18 Suri S, Gupta S, Sudhakar PJ, Venkataramu NK, Sood B, Wig JD.
Comparative evaluation of plain films,ultrasound and CT in the
diagnosis
of intestinal obstruction. Acta Radiol 1999; 40: 422-428
19 Axelrod DA, Sonnad SS, Hirschl RB. An economic evaluation of
sonographic examination of children with suspected
appendicitis.
J Pediatr Surge 2000; 35: 1236-1241
20 Emil S, Mikhail P, Laberge JM, Flageole H, Nguyen LT, Shaw KS,
Baican L, Oudjhane K. Clinical versus sonographic evaluation of
acute
appendicitis in children: a comparison of patient characteristics and outcomes. J
Pediatr Surge 2001; 36: 780-783
21 Dilley A, Wesson D, Munden M, Hicks J, Brandt M, Minifee P,
Nuchtern J. The impact of ultrasound examinations on the
management
of children with suspected appendicitis: a 3-year analysis. J Pediatr Surge
2001; 36: 303-308
22 Smoljanic Z, Zivic G, Krstic Z, Milanovic D, Vukanic D, Lukac R.
Intestinal intussusception in children. Ultrasonic diagnosis.
Srp
Arh Celok Lek 2000; 128: 259-261
23 Dugougeat F, Navarro O, Daneman A. The role of sonography in
children with abdominal pain after recent successful reduction
of
intussusception. Pediatr Radiol 2001; 30: 654
24 Tiao MM, Wan YL, Ng SH, Ko SF, Lee TY, Chen MC, Shieh CS, Chuang
JH. Sonographic features of small-bowel intussusception
in
pediatric patients. Acad Emerg Med 2001; 8: 368-373
25 Sirlin CB, Casola G, Brown MA, Patel N, Bendavid EJ, Hoyt DB.
Quantification of fluid on screening ultrasonography for blunt
abdominal
trauma: a simple scoring system to predict severity of injury. J Ultrasound
Med 2001; 20: 359-364
26 Ma OJ, Kefer MP, Stevison KF, Mateer JR. Operative versus
nonoperative management of blunt abdominal trauma: Role of
ultrasound-measured
intraperitoneal fluid levels. Am J Emerg Med 2001; 19: 284-286
27 Rathaus V, Zissin R, Werner M, Erez I, Shapiro M, Grunebaum M,
Konen O. Minimal pelvic fluid in blunt abdominal trauma in
children:
the significance of this sonographic finding. J Pediatr Surg 2001; 36:
1387-1389
28 Kokoska ER, Keller MS, Weber TR. Acute ovarian torsion in
children. Am J Surg 2000; 180: 462-465
29 Chiaramonte C, Piscopo A, Cataliotti F. Ovarian cysts in
newborns. Pediatr Surg Int 2001; 17: 171-174
30 Yip WC, Ho TF, Yip YY, Chan KY. Value of abdominal sonography in
the assessment of children with abdominal pain.
J
Clin Ultrasound 1998; 26: 397-400
31 Puylaert JB. Ultrasound of acute GI tract conditions. Eur
Rakiol 2001; 11: 1867-1877
32 Li YM, Zhao HB, Cui L, Jin P, Xia HW. An analysis of sonographic
examination in gastrointestinal perforation diseases. Shijie
Huaren
Xiaohua Zazhi 1998; 6: 446
33 Haecker FM, Berger D, Schumacher U, Friess D, Schweizer P.
Peritonitis in childhood: aspects of pathogensis and therapy.
Pediatr
Surg Int 2000; 16:182-188
34 Zhou H, Cheng W. Primary peritonitis in children. Ann Coll
Surg HK 2000; 4: 53-56
35 John SD. Trends in pediatric emergency imaging. Radiol Clin
North Am 1999; 37:995-1034
36 Klein MD, Rabbani AB, Rood KD, Durham T, Rosenberg NM, Bahr MJ,
Thomas RL, Langenburg SE, Kuhns LR. Three quantitative
approaches
to the diagnosis of abdominal pain in children: practical applications of
decision theory.
J
pediatr Surg 2001; 36: 1375-1380
37 Sivit CJ, Siegel MJ, Applegate KE, Newman KD. When appendicitis
is suspected in children. Radiographics 2001; 21: 247-262
38 Turan C, Tutus A, Ozokutan BH, Yolcu T, Kose O, Kayseri MK: The
evaluation of technetium 99m-citrate scintigraphy in children
with
suspected appendicitiss. J Pediatr Surg 1999; 34: 1272-1275
39 Sun XL, Xu HB. Comparative study among open, laparoscopic and
video-assisted appendectomies.
Shijie
Huaren Xiaohua Zazhi 1998; 6: 710-711
40 Xu HB. Problems and strategies of laparoscopic surgery. Shijie
Huaren Xiaohua Zazhi 1999; 7: 1059-1060
41 Liu GL. Advancement of laparoscopic surgery in China. Shijie
Huaren Xiaohua Zazhi 1999; 7: 260-261
42 Zou YT. Application of laparoscopy in diagnosis and treatment of
abdominal injuries.
Shijie
Huaren Xiaohua Zazhi 2000; 8: 1261-1262
43 Huang ZH, Qian WF, Jiang ZS. Application of laparoscopy in
gastrointestinal surgery.
Shijie
Huaren Xiaohua Zazhi 2000; 8: 1263-1265
44 Zhou H, Zhang JZ, Jia LQ: The use of portable B-mode ultrasound
in a acute abdomen among children.
Zhonghua
Xiaoer Waike Zazhi 1995; 16: 216-217
Edited by Hu DK