|
1
|
Diercks DB, Adkins EJ, Harrison N, Sokolove PE, Kwok H, Wolf SJ, Diercks DB, Anderson JD, Byyny R, Carpenter CR, Friedman B, Gemme SR, Gerardo CJ, Godwin SA, Hahn SA, Hatten BW, Haukoos JS, Kaji A, Kwok H, Lo BM, Mace SE, Moran M, Promes SB, Shah KH, Shih RD, Silvers SM, Slivinski A, Smith MD, Thiessen MEW, Tomaszewski CA, Trent S, Valente JH, Wall SP, Westafer LM, Yu Y, Cantrill SV, Finnell JT, Schulz T, Vandertulip K. Clinical Policy: Critical Issues in the Evaluation and Management of Emergency Department Patients With Suspected Appendicitis: Approved by ACEP Board of Directors February 1, 2023. Ann Emerg Med 2023; 81:e115-e152. [PMID: 37210169 DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2023.01.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/22/2023]
|
|
2
|
The Use of Enteric Contrast in the Emergency Setting. Radiol Clin North Am 2023; 61:37-51. [PMID: 36336390 DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2022.09.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
|
|
3
|
Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography and ultrasound for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiography (Lond) 2022; 28:1127-1141. [PMID: 36130469 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2022.08.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2022] [Revised: 08/10/2022] [Accepted: 08/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The diagnosis of acute appendicitis remains challenging. This review determined the current diagnostic accuracy of CT and ultrasound for suspected acute appendicitis in adults. METHODS This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA for diagnostic test accuracy guidelines. A systematic search was undertaken in appropriate databases. Screening of potential titles and abstracts, full-text retrieval, methodological quality assessment using QUADAS, and data extraction was performed. Meta-analyses were performed for relevant subgroups, and sensitivity analysis was completed to account for outliers. GRADE was utilized to assess the certainty of findings. RESULTS 31 studies evaluating CT, 10 evaluating US, and six evaluating both were included. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for CT was 0.972 [0.958, 0.981] and 0.956 [0.941, 0.967] respectively, and 0.821 [0.738, 0.882] and 0.859 [0.727, 0.933] for US, respectively. When analyzing subgroups based on the use of contrast enhancement, sensitivity and specificity was highest for CT with intravenous and oral contrast (0.992 [0.965, 0.998], 0.974 [0.936, 0.99]), compared to CT with intravenous contrast (0.955 [0.922, 0.974], 0.942 [0.916, 0.960]). Low-Dose CT produced comparable values (0.934 [0.885,0.963], 0.937 [0.911, 0.955]) relative to these subgroups and standard dose non-contrast CT (0.877 [0.774,0.937], 0.914 [0.827, 0.959]). US studies which excluded equivocal findings demonstrated significantly greater values than the remainder of US studies (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION The updated diagnostic test accuracies of CT, US and relevant subgroups should be implemented in light of factors such as dose, cost, and timing. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE For diagnosis of adult acute appendicitis: • CT with intravenous plus oral contrast enhancement yields statistically significantly greater diagnostic accuracy than CT with intravenous contrast alone. • Low-dose CT yields comparable sensitivity and specificity to standard-dose CT. • Ultrasound studies which exclude equivocal results may overinflate sensitivity and specificity.
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Shapira-Zaltsberg G, Dien Esquivel M, Mitsakakis N, Hayawi L, Miller E. Is Oral Contrast Beneficial for Visualization of the Appendix in Low-Weight Children? Can Assoc Radiol J 2022; 73:568-572. [PMID: 34989270 DOI: 10.1177/08465371211064315] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: It has been shown that oral contrast does not improve the diagnostic accuracy of Computed Tomography (CT) for appendicitis in pediatric patients; however, the cohorts in these studies were not stratified by weight or body mass index. The purpose of this study is to assess the benefit of oral contrast administration for identifying the appendix in younger children in the lower weight quartile. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study comprised 100 patients (2-10 years) in lower weight quartile who had intravenous contrast-enhanced CT of the abdomen and pelvis, 37 of which with oral contrast, and 63 without. A pediatric radiologist and a pediatric radiology fellow independently assessed whether the appendix was visualized or not. In case of discrepancy, an additional pediatric radiologist was the "tie-breaker." Chi-squared test was used to compare the proportion of visualized appendix between the groups (with and without oral contrast). Inter-rater reliability was determined using Cohen's Kappa coefficient. Results: There was no significant difference in the visualization of the appendix between the group with oral contrast and without (P = 1). The Cohen Kappa coefficients were .33 (.05, .62) and .91 (.73, 1.00) for the "no oral" and "oral" groups, respectively, yielding evidence of a difference (P = .007). Conclusions: There was no significant difference in the visualization of the appendix using CT with or without oral contrast in low-weight pediatric patients. The inter-rater reliability, however, was significantly higher in the group given oral contrast. Additional studies assessing the value of oral contrast for the sole indication of appendicitis may provide clearer results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Maria Dien Esquivel
- Department of Medical Imaging, 27338CHEO, ON, Canada
- University of Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | | | - Lamia Hayawi
- 274065CHEO Research Institute, ON, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Elka Miller
- Department of Medical Imaging, 27338CHEO, ON, Canada
- University of Ottawa, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Winner C, Mander GTW. Diagnostic accuracy of positive oral contrast in abdominal computed tomography for non-traumatic pathologies: a systematic review protocol. JBI Evid Synth 2021; 19:1742-1748. [PMID: 33577231 DOI: 10.11124/jbies-20-00217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this review is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of positive oral contrast versus no oral contrast for common, non-traumatic computed tomography abdominal indications in adults. INTRODUCTION Positive oral contrast is regularly administered to patients to drink prior to computed tomography scans of the abdomen and pelvis. The purpose of the preparation is to improve visualization of the bowel, however, technological advances in scanner design may mean positive oral contrast is no longer required. INCLUSION CRITERIA Eligible studies will consider the use of positive oral contrast in non-traumatic indications for computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis to include appendicitis, bowel obstruction, diverticulitis, intestinal neoplasms and metastasis (screening or staging), or acute abdomen. The review will use the discharge diagnosis as the reference standard. Studies that describe adult patients (18+) and published from 2000 on will be considered. METHODS MEDLINE Complete, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus will be searched, along with Google Scholar and numerous radiology college websites. Screening of potential titles and abstracts, retrieval of full-text studies, assessment of methodological quality, and data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. Meta-analyses will be performed, if possible, and a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Summary of Findings presented. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER PROSPERO (CRD42020184285).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine Winner
- Department of Medical Imaging, Toowoomba Hospital, Darling Downs Hospital and Health Service, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Ultrasound and CT in the Diagnosis of Appendicitis: Accuracy With Consideration of Indeterminate Examinations According to STARD Guidelines. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2020; 215:639-644. [PMID: 32406773 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.19.22370] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. The objective of our study was to determine the accuracy of ultrasound (US) and CT in diagnosing appendicitis at our institution while taking into account the number of indeterminate examinations in accordance with the Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively evaluated 790 patients who underwent US, CT, or both for evaluation of suspected appendicitis between May 1, 2013, and April 30, 2015. Patient characteristics and US and CT examination results were recorded. The reference standard was histopathology or 3 months of medical record follow-up if surgery was not performed; 3 × 2 tables were generated, and sensitivity, specificity, overall test yield, and accuracy were calculated according to STARD guidelines. For surgical cases, time to surgery (one-way ANOVA) was compared among patients who underwent US alone, CT alone, or both US and CT. RESULTS. A total of 473 of 562 US examinations had indeterminate findings (overall test yield, 15.8%); sensitivity and specificity in the 89 diagnostic examinations were 98.5% and 54.2%, respectively. Thirteen of 522 CT examinations were indeterminate (overall test yield, 97.5%); sensitivity and specificity in the remaining 509 CT examinations were 98.9% and 97.2%, respectively. Taking indeterminate studies into account, the accuracy was 13.7% for US and 95.6% for CT. The negative appendectomy rates were 17.7% (11/62) for US and 3.3% (9/276) for CT (p = 0.0002). Time to surgery was longer for patients who underwent US and CT (mean ± SD, 17.7 ± 8.9 hours) than US alone (12.9 ± 6.4 hours; p = 0.002) but was not longer for patients who underwent CT alone (16.3 ± 8.4 hours; p = 0.45). CONCLUSION. At our institution, a large proportion of US examinations are indeterminate for appendicitis. CT is the preferred first-line imaging test for evaluating appendicitis in nonobstetric adult patients.
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Bord S, El Khuri C. High-Risk Chief Complaints III. Emerg Med Clin North Am 2020; 38:499-522. [DOI: 10.1016/j.emc.2020.02.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|
|
8
|
Patel K, Zha N, Neumann S, Tembelis MN, Juliano M, Samreen N, Hussain J, Moshiri M, Patlas MN, Katz DS. Computed Tomography of Common Bowel Emergencies. Semin Roentgenol 2020; 55:150-169. [PMID: 32438977 DOI: 10.1053/j.ro.2019.11.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
|
|
9
|
Mimery A, Pereira R, Tsao SCH. Left-sided tubo-ovarian abscess mimicking appendicitis: a diagnostic dilemma. ANZ J Surg 2020; 90:2092-2093. [PMID: 32077572 DOI: 10.1111/ans.15770] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2019] [Revised: 01/07/2020] [Accepted: 02/03/2020] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Mimery
- Department of Surgery, Gladstone Hospital, Gladstone, Queensland, Australia
| | - Ryan Pereira
- Department of Surgery, Gladstone Hospital, Gladstone, Queensland, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Soucy Z, Cheng D, Vilke GM, Childers R. Systematic Review: The Role of Intravenous and Oral Contrast in the Computed Tomography Evaluation of Acute Appendicitis. J Emerg Med 2020; 58:162-166. [PMID: 31843324 DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2019.10.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2019] [Accepted: 10/27/2019] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This systematic review provides practicing emergency physicians updated information regarding the role of oral and intravenous contrast in the computed tomography (CT) evaluation of acute appendicitis. METHODS A PubMed literature search was conducted from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 2018 and limited to human clinical trials written in English with relevant keywords. High-quality studies were identified and then underwent a structured review. Recommendations are made based on the literature review. RESULTS Fifty-seven articles met criteria for rigorous review, of which 14 were appropriate for citation in this review. Excellent evidence shows that oral contrast does not improve the test characteristics of CT with intravenous contrast (IVCT) in the evaluation of adults suspected of having acute appendicitis. Good evidence shows that noncontrast abdominal CTs have excellent test characteristics for this same group of patients. CONCLUSIONS Considering its downsides and lack of utility, the medical literature does not support using oral contrast in the evaluation of acute appendicitis. There is no direct evidence showing that IVCT is better than a noncontrast CT in the evaluation of acute appendicitis; however, the available literature is consistent with slightly better test characteristics for IVCTs. Still, if IVCT cannot be obtained in a timely manner, noncontrast CTs are extremely accurate in detecting this disease.
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Rud B, Vejborg TS, Rappeport ED, Reitsma JB, Wille‐Jørgensen P. Computed tomography for diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 2019:CD009977. [PMID: 31743429 PMCID: PMC6953397 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd009977.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diagnosing acute appendicitis (appendicitis) based on clinical evaluation, blood testing, and urinalysis can be difficult. Therefore, in persons with suspected appendicitis, abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) is often used as an add-on test following the initial evaluation to reduce remaining diagnostic uncertainty. The aim of using CT is to assist the clinician in discriminating between persons who need surgery with appendicectomy and persons who do not. OBJECTIVES Primary objective Our primary objective was to evaluate the accuracy of CT for diagnosing appendicitis in adults with suspected appendicitis. Secondary objectives Our secondary objectives were to compare the accuracy of contrast-enhanced versus non-contrast-enhanced CT, to compare the accuracy of low-dose versus standard-dose CT, and to explore the influence of CT-scanner generation, radiologist experience, degree of clinical suspicion of appendicitis, and aspects of methodological quality on diagnostic accuracy. SEARCH METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index until 16 June 2017. We also searched references lists. We did not exclude studies on the basis of language or publication status. SELECTION CRITERIA We included prospective studies that compared results of CT versus outcomes of a reference standard in adults (> 14 years of age) with suspected appendicitis. We excluded studies recruiting only pregnant women; studies in persons with abdominal pain at any location and with no particular suspicion of appendicitis; studies in which all participants had undergone ultrasonography (US) before CT and the decision to perform CT depended on the US outcome; studies using a case-control design; studies with fewer than 10 participants; and studies that did not report the numbers of true-positives, false-positives, false-negatives, and true-negatives. Two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently collected the data from each study and evaluated methodological quality according to the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy - Revised (QUADAS-2) tool. We used the bivariate random-effects model to obtain summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity. MAIN RESULTS We identified 64 studies including 71 separate study populations with a total of 10,280 participants (4583 with and 5697 without acute appendicitis). Estimates of sensitivity ranged from 0.72 to 1.0 and estimates of specificity ranged from 0.5 to 1.0 across the 71 study populations. Summary sensitivity was 0.95 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 0.96), and summary specificity was 0.94 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.95). At the median prevalence of appendicitis (0.43), the probability of having appendicitis following a positive CT result was 0.92 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.94), and the probability of having appendicitis following a negative CT result was 0.04 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.05). In subgroup analyses according to contrast enhancement, summary sensitivity was higher for CT with intravenous contrast (0.96, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.98), CT with rectal contrast (0.97, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.99), and CT with intravenous and oral contrast enhancement (0.96, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.98) than for unenhanced CT (0.91, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.93). Summary sensitivity of CT with oral contrast enhancement (0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.94) and unenhanced CT was similar. Results show practically no differences in summary specificity, which varied from 0.93 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.95) to 0.95 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.98) between subgroups. Summary sensitivity for low-dose CT (0.94, 95% 0.90 to 0.97) was similar to summary sensitivity for standard-dose or unspecified-dose CT (0.95, 95% 0.93 to 0.96); summary specificity did not differ between low-dose and standard-dose or unspecified-dose CT. No studies had high methodological quality as evaluated by the QUADAS-2 tool. Major methodological problems were poor reference standards and partial verification primarily due to inadequate and incomplete follow-up in persons who did not have surgery. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The sensitivity and specificity of CT for diagnosing appendicitis in adults are high. Unenhanced standard-dose CT appears to have lower sensitivity than standard-dose CT with intravenous, rectal, or oral and intravenous contrast enhancement. Use of different types of contrast enhancement or no enhancement does not appear to affect specificity. Differences in sensitivity and specificity between low-dose and standard-dose CT appear to be negligible. The results of this review should be interpreted with caution for two reasons. First, these results are based on studies of low methodological quality. Second, the comparisons between types of contrast enhancement and radiation dose may be unreliable because they are based on indirect comparisons that may be confounded by other factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bo Rud
- Copenhagen University Hospital HvidovreGastrounit, Surgical DivisionKettegaards Alle 30HvidovreDenmark2650
| | - Thomas S Vejborg
- Bispebjerg Hospital, University of CopenhagenDepartment of Radiology R23 Bispebjerg BakkeCopenhagenDenmarkDK 2400 NV
| | - Eli D Rappeport
- Bispebjerg Hospital, University of CopenhagenDepartment of Radiology R23 Bispebjerg BakkeCopenhagenDenmarkDK 2400 NV
| | - Johannes B Reitsma
- University Medical Center UtrechtJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary CarePO Box 85500UtrechtNetherlands3508 GA Utrecht
| | - Peer Wille‐Jørgensen
- Bispebjerg HospitalDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology KBispebjerg Bakke 23Copenhagen NVDenmarkDK‐2400
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Positive Oral Contrast Solution at MDCT for Suspected Acute Appendicitis in Adults: Rate of Appendiceal Luminal Filling of Normal and Inflamed Appendixes. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2019; 213:W211-W217. [DOI: 10.2214/ajr.18.21019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
|
|
13
|
|
|
14
|
Quadri R, Vasan V, Hester C, Porembka M, Fielding J. Comprehensive review of typical and atypical pathology of the appendix on CT: cases with clinical implications. Clin Imaging 2018; 53:65-77. [PMID: 30316106 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2018.08.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2018] [Revised: 08/13/2018] [Accepted: 08/22/2018] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Acute appendicitis is the most common abdominal surgical emergency in the United States with approximately 250,000 cases annually. Computed Tomography (CT) has emerged as the most accurate diagnostic test to triage these patients for emergent surgery. Although the radiology search pattern is prioritized to detect an inflamed appendix, not all appearances equate to a typical surgical appendicitis. There are a select set of atypical pathologies involving the appendix that have subtle differences on CT, but can have catastrophic complications if treated with emergent appendectomy. This paper will review the spectrum of CT appearances and clinical management for typical and atypical appendiceal pathologies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rehan Quadri
- University of Texas Southwestern Department of Radiology, United States of America.
| | - Vasantha Vasan
- University of Texas Southwestern Department of Radiology, United States of America
| | - Caitlin Hester
- University of Texas Southwestern Department of Surgery, United States of America
| | - Matthew Porembka
- University of Texas Southwestern Department of Surgery, United States of America
| | - Julia Fielding
- University of Texas Southwestern Department of Radiology, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Using Body Mass Index and Bioelectric Impedance Analysis to Assess the Need for Positive Oral Contrast Agents Before Abdominopelvic CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018; 211:340-346. [PMID: 29873504 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.17.19127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to determine whether body fat percentage, measured using a portable handheld bioelectric impedance analysis (BIA) device, and body mass index (BMI, weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) can estimate the amount of intraabdominal and intrapelvic fat and thereby predict the need for oral contrast material before abdominopelvic CT. SUBJECTS AND METHODS A prospective, institutional review board-approved study consisting of 101 patients who presented to the emergency department of a level I trauma center was conducted between June 1, 2016, and July 19, 2016. A medical student calculated patients' BMI and obtained body fat measurements from a handheld BIA device. Three fellowship-trained and board-certified radiologists who were blinded to the collected data then assigned a score of 1-5 on the basis of the amount of intraabdominal and intrapelvic fat seen on CT images. A McNemar test was used to compare overall sensitivity and specificity of this method, and a weighted Fleiss kappa score was used to determine interobserver variability between the three radiologists. RESULTS Nearly all (97%) of the patients with high BMI (BMI ≥ 25) had sufficient amounts of intraabdominal and intrapelvic fat to allow delineation of anatomic structures without the use of oral contrast material. Of the patients with low BMI (BMI ≤ 21), 83% had inadequate amounts of fat to separate intraabdominal and intrapelvic structures. For patients with intermediate BMIs (21 < BMI < 25), BIA-determined body fat percentage of 30% or more can be used to predict whether a patient will have sufficient intraabdominal and intra-pelvic fat to obviate oral contrast material for CT. CONCLUSION Using BIA in addition to BMI accurately predicts amount of intraabdominal and intrapelvic fat. This information may help guide the decision to use oral contrast material in patients presenting for abdominopelvic CT.
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Acute appendicitis in childhood: oral contrast does not improve CT diagnosis. Emerg Radiol 2018; 25:257-263. [PMID: 29306977 DOI: 10.1007/s10140-017-1574-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2017] [Accepted: 12/27/2017] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION We compared the diagnostic accuracy of CT performed without and with oral contrast for suspected appendicitis in children. METHODS In this retrospective cohort study, we reviewed abdomen/pelvis CT scans with IV contrast performed between 2011 and 2015 for suspected appendicitis. Oral contrast was used routinely before August 2013 and eliminated from the CT protocol thereafter. Diagnostic accuracy of CT was compared with operative/pathology reports, and included a 30-day follow-up period for non-surgical patients. For a secondary analysis, the oral contrast group was subdivided into "complete" (contrast extending into the cecum) or "partial" contrast. We also compared groups for CT turnaround time, the frequency of appendiceal perforation and abscess, and the potential influence of a prior appendix ultrasound. RESULTS Five hundred fifty-eight patients were included: 51.6% (n = 288) without oral contrast and 48.4% (n = 270) with oral contrast (of which 52% (n = 140/270) had "complete" contrast). There was no difference in diagnostic accuracy between the oral contrast and non-contrast groups (p = 0.903), with sensitivity/specificity of 93.8% (95% CI 84.8-98.3)/98.5% (CI 95.8-99.7) and 94.6% (CI 84.9-98.9)/98.3% (CI 95.7-99.5), respectively. Similarly, there was no difference in accuracy when comparing only "complete" contrast vs. non-contrast groups (p = 0.755). CT turnaround time for the non-contrast group was significantly faster (43.8 ± 37.6 min), on average, than the oral contrast group (137.4 ± 47.5 min). CONCLUSION For children evaluated by CT with IV contrast for suspected appendicitis, administering oral contrast increased wait time by > 90 min, did not reach the cecum in 48% of cases, and did not improve diagnostic accuracy. Oral contrast for pediatric CT appendicitis evaluation is not warranted.
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Patient-Centered Assessment of the Value of Oral Contrast Material. J Am Coll Radiol 2017; 14:1626-1631. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.06.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2017] [Revised: 06/07/2017] [Accepted: 06/27/2017] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
|
|
18
|
Kessner R, Barnes S, Halpern P, Makrin V, Blachar A. CT for Acute Nontraumatic Abdominal Pain-Is Oral Contrast Really Required? Acad Radiol 2017; 24:840-845. [PMID: 28237189 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2017.01.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2016] [Revised: 01/08/2017] [Accepted: 01/09/2017] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES This study aims to compare the diagnostic performance of abdominal computed tomography (CT) performed with and without oral contrast in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute nontraumatic abdominal pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS Between December 2013 and December 2014, 348 adult patients presenting to the ED of a large tertiary medical center with nontraumatic abdominal pain were evaluated. Exclusion criteria for the study were history of inflammatory bowel disease, recent abdominal operation and suspected renal colic, abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture, or intestinal obstruction. All patients underwent intravenous contrast-enhanced abdominal CT on a Philips Brilliance 64-slice scanner using a routine abdomen protocol. The study group included 174 patients who underwent abdominal CT scanning without oral contrast, recruited using convenience sampling. A control group of 174 patients was matched to the cohort groups' gender and age and underwent abdominal CT with oral contrast material during the same time period. The patients' medical records were reviewed for various clinical findings and for the final clinical diagnosis. The CT exams were initially reviewed by a senior attending radiologist to determine the exams' technical adequacy and to decide whether an additional scan with oral contrast was required. Two senior radiologists, blinded to the clinical diagnosis, later performed consensus reading to determine the contribution of oral contrast administration to the radiologists' diagnostic confidence and its influence on diagnosing various radiological findings. RESULTS Each group consisted of 82 men and 92 women. The average age of the two groups was 48 years. The main clinical diagnoses of the pathological examinations were appendicitis (17.5%), diverticulitis (10.9%), and colitis (5.2%). A normal CT examination was found in 34.8% of the patients. There was no significant difference between the groups regarding most of the clinical parameters that were examined. None of the examinations of all of the 174 study group patients was found to be technically inadequate, and therefore no patient had to undergo additional scanning to establish a diagnosis. The consensus reading of the senior radiologists determined that the lack of oral contrast was insignificant in 96.6% of the cases and that contrast material might have been useful in only 6 of 174 study group patients (3.4%). The radiologists found oral contrast to be helpful only in 8 of 174 control group patients (4.6%). There was no significant difference between the clinical and radiological diagnoses in both groups (study group, P = 0.261; control group, P = 0.075). CONCLUSIONS Our study shows that oral contrast is noncontributory to radiological diagnosis in most patients presenting to the ED with acute nontraumatic abdominal pain. These patients can therefore undergo abdominal CT scanning without oral contrast, with no effect on radiological diagnostic performance.
Collapse
|
|
19
|
Oral contrast administration for abdominal and pelvic CT scan in emergency setting: is there a happy medium? Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42:784-785. [PMID: 27838770 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-016-0969-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
|
|
20
|
Wadhwani A, Guo L, Saude E, Els H, Lang E, McRae A, Bhayana D. Intravenous and Oral Contrast vs Intravenous Contrast Alone Computed Tomography for the Visualization of Appendix and Diagnosis of Appendicitis in Adult Emergency Department Patients. Can Assoc Radiol J 2016; 67:234-41. [DOI: 10.1016/j.carj.2015.09.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2015] [Revised: 09/06/2015] [Accepted: 09/22/2015] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose The study sought to compare radiologist's ability to 1) visualize the appendix; 2) diagnose acute appendicitis; and 3) diagnose alternative pathologies responsible for acute abdominal pain among adult patients undergoing computed tomography (CT) scan with 3 different protocols: 1) intravenous (IV) contrast only; 2) IV and oral contrast with 1-hour transit time; and 3) IV and oral contrast with 3-hour transit time. Methods We collected data of 225 patients; 75 consecutive patients with a clinical suspicion of appendicitis received oral contrast for 3 hours and IV contrast, 75 received oral contrast for 1 hour and IV contrast, and 75 trauma patients received IV contrast only. Three independent reviewers, blinded to final pathology, retrospectively analysed the cases and documented visualization of the appendix, periappendiceal structures, and their confidence in diagnosing appendicitis. Clinical diagnoses were derived from a combination of clinical, surgical, pathologic, or radiologic follow-up. Results Frequency of visualizing the appendix within IV group alone was 87.3%, IV with oral for 1 hour was 94.1%, and IV with oral for 3 hours was 93.8%. Both oral contrast groups had 100% sensitivity and negative predictive value in diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Specificity for the 1- and 3-hour oral contrast groups was 94.1% and 96.1%, respectively and positive predictive value for both groups was 92%. Conclusions Our findings suggest that reader confidence in visualizing the appendix improved with addition of oral contrast as compared to IV contrast alone. One- and 3-hour oral regimens have a similar diagnostic performance in diagnosing appendicitis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aman Wadhwani
- Department of Radiology, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Lancia Guo
- Department of Radiology, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Erik Saude
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Hein Els
- Department of Radiology, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Eddie Lang
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Andrew McRae
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Deepak Bhayana
- Department of Radiology, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
|
21
|
Pre-operative CT predictors associated with 30-day adverse events in patients with appendiceal inflammatory masses who underwent immediate appendectomies. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2016; 40:2263-71. [PMID: 26054981 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-015-0478-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To retrospectively evaluate pre-operative CT predictors that are associated with 30-day adverse events in patients who underwent immediate appendectomies for appendiceal inflammatory masses. METHODS This retrospective study was approved by our institutional review board, and the requirement for informed consent was waived. One hundred forty-four consecutive patients who underwent immediate appendectomies and were diagnosed with appendiceal inflammatory masses by pre-operative CT from January 2005 to December 2013 at a tertiary hospital were included. The main outcome measure was 30-day adverse events. Patient demographics and data for inflammatory markers including leukocyte counts, segmented neutrophils, and C-reactive protein levels were collected by a single radiologist. Pre- and post-operative CT findings were evaluated for features of appendiceal inflammatory masses, associated findings, and post-operative adverse events by two radiologists in a blinded fashion with consensus to assess surgical and pathologic results, post-operative outcomes, and original CT interpretations. Appendiceal inflammatory masses were defined as complicated appendicitis with a phlegmon or an abscess that was identified on pre-operative CT exam. Factors associated with 30-day adverse events were assessed using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS A total of 22 (15%) of the 144 patients (mean age [±SD] 44.6 ± 22.0 years, range 3-97 years) experienced 30-day adverse events: ten intra-abdominal abscesses, three wound infections, two cases of peritonitis, two small bowel obstructions, two intra-abdominal abscesses with peritonitis, one intra-abdominal abscess with wound infection, one intra-abdominal abscess with small bowel obstruction, and one case of peritonitis with small bowel obstruction. In univariate analysis, the presence of appendicolith (odds ratio [OR] 2.49, p = 0.048) and high-grade obstruction (OR 3.79; p = 0.01) were associated with adverse events. High-grade obstruction (adjusted OR 3.05; p = 0.04) was the only independent pre-operative predictor associated with 30-day adverse events in patients with appendiceal inflammatory masses. CONCLUSIONS High-grade obstruction was an independent pre-operative CT predictor associated with 30-day adverse events in patients who underwent immediate appendectomies for appendiceal inflammatory masses.
Collapse
|
|
22
|
Hong GS, Lee CW, Kim MH, Kim C. Appendiceal location analysis and review of the misdiagnosis rate of appendicitis associated with deep pelvic cecum on multidetector computed tomography. Clin Imaging 2016; 40:714-9. [PMID: 27317216 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2016.02.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2015] [Revised: 01/21/2016] [Accepted: 02/17/2016] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To investigate appendiceal location and misdiagnosis rate of appendicitis associated with deep pelvic cecum on multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS Among 1107 appendicitis cases, 25 patients with deep pelvic cecum and 75 patients with conventional cecum on MDCT were retrospectively selected for analysis of appendiceal locations and preoperative misdiagnosis rate. RESULTS The major appendiceal direction in deep pelvic cecum group was ascending (84.0%). The misdiagnosis rates of appendicitis in deep pelvic and conventional cecum groups were 16% and 5.3%. CONCLUSION A deep pelvic cecum may cause misdiagnosis of appendicitis. The appendix associated with deep pelvic cecum mainly demonstrates right ascending direction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gil-Sun Hong
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 138-736, Republic of Korea
| | - Choong Wook Lee
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 138-736, Republic of Korea.
| | - Mi-Hyun Kim
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 138-736, Republic of Korea
| | - Cherry Kim
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 138-736, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
23
|
|
|
24
|
Oral contrast for CT in patients with acute non-traumatic abdominal and pelvic pain: what should be its current role? Emerg Radiol 2016; 23:477-81. [DOI: 10.1007/s10140-016-1403-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2016] [Accepted: 04/29/2016] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
|
|
25
|
Abstract
Although most frequently presenting with lower abdominal pain, appendicitis, colitis, and diverticulitis can cause pain throughout the abdomen and can cause peritoneal and retroperitoneal symptoms. Evaluation and management of lower intestinal disease requires a nuanced approach by the emergency physician, sometimes requiring computed tomography, ultrasonography, MRI, layered imaging, shared decision making, serial examination, and/or close follow-up. Once a presumed or confirmed diagnosis is made, appropriate treatment is initiated, and may include surgery, antibiotics, and/or steroids. Appendicitis patients should be admitted. Diverticulitis and inflammatory bowel disease can frequently be managed on an outpatient basis, but may require admission and surgical consultation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David J Carlberg
- Department of Emergency Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, 3800 Reservoir Road, NW, G-CCC, Washington, DC 20007, USA.
| | - Stephen D Lee
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 110 South Paca Street, 6th Floor, Suite 200, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA
| | - Jeffrey S Dubin
- Department of Emergency Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, 3800 Reservoir Road, NW, G-CCC, Washington, DC 20007, USA; Department of Emergency Medicine, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, 110 Irving Street, NW, Washington, DC 20010, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
26
|
The Use of Enteric Contrast Media for Diagnostic CT, MRI, and Ultrasound in Infants and Children: A Practical Approach. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 206:973-9. [DOI: 10.2214/ajr.15.15437] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
|
27
|
Hanna TN, Streicher DA, Razavi SA, Khosa F, Johnson JO, Applegate KE. Enteric Distribution of Oral Contrast in Emergency Department Patients Undergoing Abdominal-Pelvic Computed Tomography. Can Assoc Radiol J 2016; 67:204-11. [PMID: 26899379 DOI: 10.1016/j.carj.2015.09.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2015] [Revised: 08/22/2015] [Accepted: 09/07/2015] [Indexed: 10/22/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The study sought to assess the gastrointestinal (GI) distribution of oral contrast (OC) among emergency department (ED) patients and determine if contrast reaches the terminal ileum or site of pathology to assist in diagnosis. METHODS Retrospectively, adults undergoing abdominal-pelvic computed tomography (APCT) in the ED at 2 hospitals were identified over a 3-month period. APCTs were reviewed for location of OC. Presence, site, type of bowel pathology, and prior gastrointestinal surgery were documented. When applicable, the site of bowel pathology was evaluated for the presence or absence of OC. RESULTS There were 1349 exams with mean age 50.5 years (range 18-97 years), 41% male, with 530 (39%) receiving OC. In 271 of 530 (51%), OC reached the terminal ileum (TI). Bowel pathology was present in 31% of cases (165 of 530). When bowel pathology was present, 47% (77 of 165) had OC present at the pathology site. The GI tract was divided into 4 anatomic segments: OC most frequently reached pathology in stomach and duodenum (84%), but was present less frequently at sites of pathology from jejunum to TI (35%), proximal colon (57%), and distal colon (28%). In only 84 of 530 OC cases (16%) did contrast extend from the stomach to distal colon. OC administration contributed to longer mean APCT order to final report of 0.5 hours and longer mean ED length of stay of 0.8 hours compared with all patients who received APCT. CONCLUSIONS Optimal OC distribution is not achieved in more than half of ED patients, raising questions about the continued use of OC in the ED.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tarek N Hanna
- Division of Emergency Radiology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
| | - Drew A Streicher
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | | | - Faisal Khosa
- Division of Emergency Radiology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Jamlik-Omari Johnson
- Division of Emergency Radiology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Kimberly E Applegate
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
28
|
Abstract
The most common cause of acute right lower quadrant (RLQ) pain requiring surgery is acute appendicitis (AA). This narrative's focus is on imaging procedures in the diagnosis of AA, with consideration of other diseases causing RLQ pain. In general, Computed Tomography (CT) is the most accurate imaging study for evaluating suspected AA and alternative etiologies of RLQ pain. Data favor intravenous contrast use for CT, but the need for enteric contrast when intravenous contrast is used is not strongly favored. Radiation exposure concerns from CT have led to increased investigation in minimizing CT radiation dose while maintaining diagnostic accuracy and in using algorithms with ultrasound as a first imaging examination followed by CT in inconclusive cases. In children, ultrasound is the preferred initial examination, as it is nearly as accurate as CT for the diagnosis of AA in this population and without ionizing radiation exposure. In pregnant women, ultrasound is preferred initially with MRI as a second imaging examination in inconclusive cases, which is the majority.The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every three years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.
Collapse
|
|
29
|
Enteral contrast in the computed tomography diagnosis of appendicitis: comparative effectiveness in a prospective surgical cohort. Ann Surg 2015; 260:311-6. [PMID: 24598250 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000000272] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Our goal was to perform a comparative effectiveness study of intravenous (IV)-only versus IV + enteral contrast in computed tomographic (CT) scans performed for patients undergoing appendectomy across a diverse group of hospitals. BACKGROUND Small randomized trials from tertiary centers suggest that enteral contrast does not improve diagnostic performance of CT for suspected appendicitis, but generalizability has not been demonstrated. Eliminating enteral contrast may improve efficiency, patient comfort, and safety. METHODS We analyzed data for adult patients who underwent nonelective appendectomy at 56 hospitals over a 2-year period. Data were obtained directly from patient charts by trained abstractors. Multivariate logistic regression was utilized to adjust for potential confounding. The main outcome measure was concordance between final radiology interpretation and final pathology report. RESULTS A total of 9047 adults underwent appendectomy and 8089 (89.4%) underwent CT, 54.1% of these with IV contrast only and 28.5% with IV + enteral contrast. Pathology findings correlated with radiographic findings in 90.0% of patients who received IV + enteral contrast and 90.4% of patients scanned with IV contrast alone. Hospitals were categorized as rural or urban and by their teaching status. Regardless of hospital type, there was no difference in concordance between IV-only and IV + enteral contrast. After adjusting for age, sex, comorbid conditions, weight, hospital type, and perforation, odds ratio of concordance for IV + enteral contrast versus IV contrast alone was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.72-1.25). CONCLUSIONS Enteral contrast does not improve CT evaluation of appendicitis in patients undergoing appendectomy. These broadly generalizable results from a diverse group of hospitals suggest that enteral contrast can be eliminated in CT scans for suspected appendicitis.
Collapse
|
|
30
|
Kim MS, Park HW, Park JY, Park HJ, Lee SY, Hong HP, Kwag HJ, Kwon HJ. Differentiation of early perforated from nonperforated appendicitis: MDCT findings, MDCT diagnostic performance, and clinical outcome. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2015; 39:459-66. [PMID: 24633221 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-014-0117-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
To determine the CT findings and assess their diagnostic performance in differentiating early perforated appendicitis from nonperforated appendicitis, and to compare therapeutic approaches and clinical outcomes between two types of appendicitis. Our retrospective study was approved by our institutional review board and informed consent was waived. From July 2012 to July 2013, 339 patients [mean age 40.8 years; age range 19-80 years; 183 male (mean age 40.5 years; age range 19-79 years) and 156 female (mean age 41.2 years; age range 19-80 years)] who underwent appendectomy with preoperative CT examination for suspected acute appendicitis were included, with exclusion of 37 patients with specific CT findings for advanced perforated appendicitis. And they were categorized into nonperforated and early perforated appendicitis groups according to surgical and pathologic reports. The following CT findings were evaluated by two radiologists blinded to pathologic and surgical findings: transverse diameter of the appendix, thickness of the appendiceal wall, the depth of intraluminal appendiceal fluid, appendiceal wall enhancement, presence or absence of focal defect in the appendiceal wall, intraluminal appendiceal air, appendicolith/fecalith, periappendiceal changes, cecal wall thickening, and free fluid. The type of surgical procedures, performance of surgical drainage, and the length of hospital stay were recorded. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to determine the CT findings for differentiating early perforated appendicitis from nonperforated appendicitis, a total of 75 (22%) of the 339 patients was diagnosed with early perforated appendicitis. Focal wall defect [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 23.40; p < 0.001], circumferential periappendiceal changes (aOR, 5.63; p < 0.001), appendicoliths/fecaliths (aOR, 2.47; p = 0.015), and transverse diameter of the appendix (aOR, 1.22; p = 0.003) were independently differentiating variables for early perforated appendicitis. The transverse diameter of the appendix (≥11 mm) had the highest sensitivity (62.7%) and focal wall defect in the appendiceal wall showed the highest specificity (98.8%). The prevalence of surgical drainage was higher (p = 0.001) and the mean hospital stay was approximately one day longer (p < 0.001) in the early perforated group than nonperforated group. CT can be helpful in differentiating early perforated appendicitis from nonperforated appendicitis, although the sensitivity of the evaluated findings was somewhat limited.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mi Sung Kim
- Department of Radiology, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 108 Pyung dong, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 110-746, Korea
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
31
|
Evaluation of Acute Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Setting Using Computed Tomography Without Oral Contrast in Patients With Body Mass Index Greater Than 25. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2015; 39:681-6. [DOI: 10.1097/rct.0000000000000277] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
|
|
32
|
Park G, Lee SC, Choi BJ, Kim SJ. Stratified computed tomography findings improve diagnostic accuracy for appendicitis. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20:13942-13949. [PMID: 25320531 PMCID: PMC4194577 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i38.13942] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2014] [Revised: 06/12/2014] [Accepted: 07/11/2014] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM: To improve the diagnostic accuracy in patients with symptoms and signs of appendicitis, but without confirmative computed tomography (CT) findings.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the database of 224 patients who had been operated on for the suspicion of appendicitis, but whose CT findings were negative or equivocal for appendicitis. The patient population was divided into two groups: a pathologically proven appendicitis group (n = 177) and a non-appendicitis group (n = 47). The CT images of these patients were re-evaluated according to the characteristic CT features as described in the literature. The re-evaluations and baseline characteristics of the two groups were compared.
RESULTS: The two groups showed significant differences with respect to appendiceal diameter, and the presence of periappendiceal fat stranding and intraluminal air in the appendix. A larger proportion of patients in the appendicitis group showed distended appendices larger than 6.0 mm (66.3% vs 37.0%; P < 0.001), periappendiceal fat stranding (34.1% vs 8.9%; P = 0.001), and the absence of intraluminal air (67.6% vs 48.9%; P = 0.024) compared to the non-appendicitis group. Furthermore, the presence of two or more of these factors increased the odds ratio to 6.8 times higher than baseline (95%CI: 3.013-15.454; P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Appendiceal diameter and wall thickening, fat stranding, and absence of intraluminal air can be used to increased diagnostic accuracy for appendicitis with equivocal CT findings.
Collapse
|
|
33
|
Buttigieg EL, Grima KB, Cortis K, Soler SG, Zarb F. An evaluation of the use of oral contrast media in abdominopelvic CT. Eur Radiol 2014; 24:2936-44. [PMID: 25027836 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3285-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2013] [Revised: 05/27/2014] [Accepted: 06/24/2014] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of different oral contrast media (OCM) for abdominopelvic CT examinations performed for follow-up general oncological indications. The objectives were to establish anatomical image quality criteria for abdominopelvic CT; use these criteria to evaluate and compare image quality using positive OCM, neutral OCM and no OCM; and evaluate possible benefits for the medical imaging department. METHODS Forty-six adult patients attending a follow-up abdominopelvic CT for general oncological indications and who had a previous abdominopelvic CT with positive OCM (n = 46) were recruited and prospectively placed into either the water (n = 25) or no OCM (n = 21) group. Three radiologists performed absolute visual grading analysis (VGA) to assess image quality by grading the fulfilment of 24 anatomical image quality criteria. RESULTS Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis of the data showed comparable image quality with regards to reproduction of abdominal structures, bowel discrimination, presence of artefacts, and visualization of the amount of intra-abdominal fat for the three OCM protocols. CONCLUSION All three OCM protocols provided similar image quality for follow-up abdominopelvic CT for general oncological indications. KEY POINTS • Positive oral contrast media are routinely used for abdominopelvic multidetector computed tomography • Experimental study comparing image quality using three different oral contrast materials • Three different oral contrast materials result in comparable CT image quality • Benefits for patients and medical imaging department.
Collapse
|
|
34
|
Razavi SA, Johnson JO, Kassin MT, Applegate KE. The impact of introducing a no oral contrast abdominopelvic CT examination (NOCAPE) pathway on radiology turn around times, emergency department length of stay, and patient safety. Emerg Radiol 2014; 21:605-13. [DOI: 10.1007/s10140-014-1240-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2014] [Accepted: 05/14/2014] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
|
|
35
|
Chu LL, Webb EM, Stengel JW, Yeh BM, Lu Y, Coakley FV. CT of acute appendicitis: can diagnostic accuracy serve as a practical performance metric for readers specialized in abdominal imaging? Clin Imaging 2013; 38:56-9. [PMID: 24080371 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2013.08.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2012] [Revised: 08/11/2013] [Accepted: 08/26/2013] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate diagnostic accuracy for acute appendicitis at computed tomography (CT) as a performance metric for radiologists specialized in abdominal imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively identified six attending abdominal imagers who each independently interpreted over 100 CT studies for suspected acute appendicitis. RESULTS The mean number of studies per reader was 311 (range, 129-386). Mean reader diagnostic accuracy was 95.0% (range, 91.4-97.1%). Only one had a diagnostic accuracy (91.4%) that was significantly lower than all others. CONCLUSION Diagnostic accuracy for acute appendicitis at CT may be an impractical performance metric for radiologists specialized in abdominal imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa L Chu
- Department of Radiology University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Avenue, San Francisco, CA, 94143-0628
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
36
|
Lee CH, Haaland B, Earnest A, Tan CH. Use of positive oral contrast agents in abdominopelvic computed tomography for blunt abdominal injury: meta-analysis and systematic review. Eur Radiol 2013; 23:2513-21. [PMID: 23624596 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-013-2860-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/22/2012] [Revised: 01/05/2013] [Accepted: 03/25/2013] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine whether positive oral contrast agents improve accuracy of abdominopelvic CT compared with no, neutral or negative oral contrast agent. METHODS Literature was searched for studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of abdominopelvic CT with positive oral contrast agents against imaging with no, neutral or negative oral contrast agent. Meta-analysis reviewed studies correlating CT findings of blunt abdominal injury with positive and without oral contrast agents against surgical, autopsy or clinical outcome allowing derivation of pooled sensitivity and specificity. Systematic review was performed on studies with common design and reference standard. RESULTS Thirty-two studies were divided into two groups. Group 1 comprised 15 studies comparing CT with positive and without oral contrast agents. Meta-analysis of five studies from group 1 provided no difference in sensitivity or specificity between CT with positive or without oral contrast agents. Group 2 comprised 17 studies comparing CT with positive and neutral or negative oral contrast agents. Systematic review of 12 studies from group 2 indicated that neutral or negative oral contrasts were as effective as positive oral contrast agents for bowel visualisation. CONCLUSIONS There is no difference in accuracy between CT performed with positive oral contrast agents or with no, neutral or negative oral contrast agent. KEY POINTS • There is no difference in the accuracy of CT with or without oral contrast agent. • There is no difference in the accuracy of CT with Gastrografin or water. • Omission of oral contrast, utilising neutral or negative oral contrast agent saves time, costs and decreases risk of aspiration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chau Hung Lee
- Department of Radiology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, 11 Jalan Tan Tock Seng, Singapore, Singapore, 308433.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
37
|
Leeuwenburgh MMN, Wiarda BM, Wiezer MJ, Vrouenraets BC, Gratama JWC, Spilt A, Richir MC, Bossuyt PMM, Stoker J, Boermeester MA. Comparison of imaging strategies with conditional contrast-enhanced CT and unenhanced MR imaging in patients suspected of having appendicitis: a multicenter diagnostic performance study. Radiology 2013; 268:135-43. [PMID: 23481162 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13121753] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare the diagnostic performance of imaging strategies with magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and computed tomographic (CT) imaging in adult patients suspected of having appendicitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS Institutional review board approval was obtained prior to study initiation, and patients gave written informed consent. In a multicenter diagnostic performance study, adults suspected of having appendicitis were prospectively identified in the emergency department. Consenting patients underwent ultrasonography (US) and subsequent contrast-enhanced CT if US imaging yielded negative or inconclusive results. Additionally, all patients underwent unenhanced MR imaging, with the reader blinded to other findings. An expert panel assigned final diagnosis after 3 months. Diagnostic performance of three imaging strategies was evaluated: conditional CT after US, conditional MR imaging after US, and immediate MR imaging. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated by comparing findings with final diagnosis. RESULTS Between March and September 2010, 229 US, 115 CT, and 223 MR examinations were performed in 230 patients (median age, 35 years; 40% men). Appendicitis was the final diagnosis in 118 cases. Conditional and immediate MR imaging had sensitivity and specificity comparable to that of conditional CT, which resulted in 3% (three of 118; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1%, 7%) missed appendicitis, and 8% (10 of 125; 95% CI: 4%, 14%) false-positives. Conditional MR missed appendicitis in 2% (two of 118; 95% CI: 0%, 6%) and generated 10% (13 of 129; 95% CI: 6%, 16%) false-positives. Immediate MR missed 3% (four of 117; 95% CI: 1%, 8%) appendicitis with 6% (seven of 120; 95% CI: 3%, 12%) false-positives. Conditional strategies resulted in more false-positives in women than in men (conditional CT, 17% vs 0%; P = .03; conditional MR, 19% vs 1%; P = .04), wherease immediate MR imaging did not. CONCLUSION The accuracy of conditional or immediate MR imaging was similar to that of conditional CT in patients suspected of having appendicitis, which implied that strategies with MR imaging may replace conditional CT for appendicitis detection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marjolein M N Leeuwenburgh
- Department of Radiology, Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
38
|
Added value of ultrasound re-evaluation for patients with equivocal CT findings of acute appendicitis: a preliminary study. Eur Radiol 2013; 23:1882-90. [DOI: 10.1007/s00330-013-2769-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2012] [Revised: 12/08/2012] [Accepted: 12/12/2012] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
|
|
39
|
Broder JS, Hamedani AG, Liu SW, Emerman CL. Emergency Department Contrast Practices for Abdominal/Pelvic Computed Tomography—A National Survey and Comparison with the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria®. J Emerg Med 2013; 44:423-33. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2012.08.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2012] [Revised: 05/08/2012] [Accepted: 08/24/2012] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
|
|
40
|
Hopkins CL, Madsen T, Foy Z, Reina M, Barton E. Does limiting oral contrast decrease emergency department length of stay? West J Emerg Med 2013; 13:383-7. [PMID: 23359477 PMCID: PMC3556944 DOI: 10.5811/westjem.2011.12.6748] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2011] [Revised: 09/01/2011] [Accepted: 12/15/2011] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to examine the impact on emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) of a new protocol for intravenous (IV)-contrast only abdominal/pelvic computed tomography (ABCT) compared to historical controls. Methods: This was a retrospective case-controlled study performed at a single academic medical center. Patients ≥ 18 undergoing ABCT imaging for non-traumatic abdominal pain were included in the study. We compared ED LOS between historical controls undergoing ABCT imaging with PO/IV contrast and study patients undergoing an IV-contrast-only protocol. Imaging indications were the same for both groups and included patients with clinical suspicion for appendicitis, diverticulitis, small bowel obstruction, or perforation. We identified all patients from the hospital’s electronic storehouse (imaging code, ordering department, imaging times), and we abstracted ED LOS and disposition from electronic medical records. Results: Two hundred and eleven patients who underwent PO/IV ABCT prep were compared to 184 patients undergoing IV-contrast only ABCT prep. ED LOS was shorter for patients imaged with the IV-contrast only protocol (4:35 hrs vs. 6:39 hrs, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Implementation of an IV-contrast only ABCT prep for select ED patients presenting for evaluation of acute abdominal pain significantly decreased ED LOS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christy L Hopkins
- Department of Surgery, Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
41
|
Whether intravenous contrast is necessary for CT diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adult ED patients? Acad Radiol 2013; 20:73-8. [PMID: 22951113 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2012.07.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2012] [Revised: 07/10/2012] [Accepted: 07/20/2012] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES To assess the necessity of intravenous contrast medium for abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) diagnosis of acute appendicitis (APP) among adult patients with right lower quadrant (RLQ) abdominal pain at emergency department (ED). MATERIALS AND METHODS ED patients with clinical suspicion of APP from RLQ pain for a period of 8 months were enrolled retrospectively. Both pre- and postintravenous contrast-enhanced CT scans were performed for these patients. The visibility of vermiform appendix and specific CT findings of APP were recorded separately for noncontrast CT (NCT) and contrast-enhanced CT (CCT) images without knowledge of the patient's identity and final diagnosis. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of CT diagnosis for APP were compared between the two groups. The ease of identifying appendix was also compared. RESULTS Forty-two (42.0%) of the 100 patients (55 males, 45 females; age range, 16-90 years; mean age, 49.3 years) were APP. There was no significant difference for the visibility of appendix (94% vs. 91%; P = .589) and radiological characters between the CCT and NCT groups. There were significant differences between the two groups for sensitivity (100% vs. 90.5%; P = .036), specificity (94.8% vs. 100%; P = .038), PPV (93.3% vs. 100%; P = .021), NPV (100% vs. 93.5%; P = .021), but no significant difference for accuracy (97% vs. 96%; P = 1). The appendix was easier to detect on CCT than NCT images (P = .013). CONCLUSION The diagnostic sensitivity of CCT was significantly better than that of NCT. Intravenous contrast administration could also make doctors easier in indentifying appendixes.
Collapse
|
|
42
|
Levenson RB, Camacho MA, Horn E, Saghir A, McGillicuddy D, Sanchez LD. Eliminating routine oral contrast use for CT in the emergency department: impact on patient throughput and diagnosis. Emerg Radiol 2012; 19:513-7. [DOI: 10.1007/s10140-012-1059-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2012] [Accepted: 06/12/2012] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
|
43
|
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; 30:1765-73. [PMID: 22633722 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2012.02.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2011] [Revised: 02/15/2012] [Accepted: 02/17/2012] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE When the diagnosis of appendicitis is uncertain, computerized tomography (CT) scans are frequently ordered. Oral contrast is often used but is time consuming and of questionable benefit. This study compared CT with intravenous contrast alone (IV) to CT with IV and oral contrast (IVO) in adult patients with suspected appendicitis. METHODS This is a prospective, randomized study conducted in a community teaching emergency department (ED). Patients with suspected appendicitis were randomized to IV or IVO CT. Scans were read independently by 2 designated study radiologists blinded to the clinical outcome. Surgical pathology was used to confirm appendicitis in patients who went to the operating room (OR). Discharged patients were followed up via telephone. The primary outcome measure was the diagnosis of appendicitis. Secondary measures included time from triage to ED disposition and triage to OR. RESULTS Both IV (n = 114) and IVO (n = 113) scans had 100% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.3-100 and 87.4-100, respectively) and negative predictive value (95% CI, 93.7-100 and 93.9-100, respectively) for appendicitis. Specificity of IV and IVO scans was 98.6 and 94.9 (95% CI, 91.6-99.9 and 86.9-98.4, respectively), respectively, with positive predictive values of 97.6 and 89.5 (95% CI, 85.9-99.9 and 74.2-96.6). Median times to ED disposition and OR were 1 hour and 31 minutes (P < .0001) and 1 hour and 10 minutes (P = .089) faster for the IV group, respectively. Patients with negative IV scans were discharged nearly 2 hours faster (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS Computerized tomography scans with intravenous contrast alone have comparable diagnostic performance to IVO scans for appendicitis in adults. Patients receiving IV scans are discharged from the ED faster than those receiving IVO scans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew M Kepner
- Department of Emergency Medicine, York Hospital, York, PA 17405, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
44
|
Grover CA, Sternbach G. Charles McBurney: McBurney's Point. J Emerg Med 2012; 42:578-81. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2011.06.039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2010] [Accepted: 06/01/2011] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
|
45
|
Kocher KE, Meurer WJ, Desmond JS, Nallamothu BK. Effect of testing and treatment on emergency department length of stay using a national database. Acad Emerg Med 2012; 19:525-34. [PMID: 22594356 DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2012.01353.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 168] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Testing and treatment are essential aspects of the delivery of emergency care. Recognition of the effects of these activities on emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) has implications for administrators planning efficient operations, providers, and patients regarding expectations for length of visit; researchers in creating better models to predict LOS; and policy-makers concerned about ED crowding. METHODS A secondary analysis was performed using years 2006 through 2008 of the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS), a nationwide study of ED services. In univariate and bivariate analyses, the authors assessed ED LOS and frequency of testing (blood test, urinalysis, electrocardiogram [ECG], radiograph, ultrasound, computed tomography [CT], or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) and treatment (providing a medication or performance of a procedure) according to disposition (discharged or admitted status). Two sets of multivariable models were developed to assess the contribution of testing and treatment to LOS, also stratified by disposition. The first was a series of logistic regression models to provide an overview of how testing and treatment activity affects three dichotomized LOS cutoffs at 2, 4, and 6 hours. The second was a generalized linear model (GLM) with a log-link function and gamma distribution to fit skewed LOS data, which provided time costs associated with tests and treatment. RESULTS Among 360 million weighted ED visits included in this analysis, 227 million (63%) involved testing, 304 million (85%) involved treatment, and 201 million (56%) involved both. Overall, visits with any testing were associated with longer LOS (median = 196 minutes; interquartile range [IQR] = 125 to 305 minutes) than those with any treatment (median = 159 minutes; IQR = 91 to 262 minutes). This difference was more pronounced among discharged patients than admitted patients. Obtaining a test was associated with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 2.29 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.86 to 2.83) for experiencing a more than 4-hour LOS, while performing a treatment had no effect (adjusted OR = 0.84; 95% CI = 0.68 to 1.03). The most time-costly testing modalities included blood test (adjusted marginal effects on LOS = +72 minutes; 95% CI = 66 to 78 minutes), MRI (+64 minutes; 95% CI = 36 to 93 minutes), CT (+59 minutes; 95% CI = 54 to 65 minutes), and ultrasound (US; +56 minutes; 95% CI = 45 to 67 minutes). Treatment time costs were less substantial: performing a procedure (+24 minutes; 95% CI = 20 to 28 minutes) and providing a medication (+15 minutes; 95% CI = 8 to 21 minutes). CONCLUSIONS Testing and less substantially treatment were associated with prolonged LOS in the ED, particularly for blood testing and advanced imaging. This knowledge may better direct efforts at streamlining delivery of care for the most time-costly diagnostic modalities or suggest areas for future research into improving processes of care. Developing systems to improve efficient utilization of these services in the ED may improve patient and provider satisfaction. Such practice improvements could then be examined to determine their effects on ED crowding.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keith E Kocher
- Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
46
|
Barrett TW, Schriger DL. Computed Tomography Imaging in the Emergency Department: Benefits, Risks and Risk Ratios. Ann Emerg Med 2012; 59:328-34. [DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.11.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
|
|
47
|
Rosen MP, Ding A, Blake MA, Baker ME, Cash BD, Fidler JL, Grant TH, Greene FL, Jones B, Katz DS, Lalani T, Miller FH, Small WC, Spottswood S, Sudakoff GS, Tulchinsky M, Warshauer DM, Yee J, Coley BD. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® right lower quadrant pain--suspected appendicitis. J Am Coll Radiol 2012; 8:749-55. [PMID: 22051456 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2011.07.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 115] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2011] [Accepted: 07/25/2011] [Indexed: 02/09/2023]
Abstract
The diagnostic imaging of patients presenting with right lower quadrant pain and suspected appendicitis may be organized according to age and gender and to the presence or absence of "classic" signs and symptoms of acute appendicitis. Among adult patients presenting with clinical signs of acute appendicitis, the sensitivity and specificity of CT are greater than those of ultrasound, with improved performance when CT is performed with intravenous contrast. The use of rectal contrast has been associated with decreased time in the emergency department. Computed tomography has also been shown to reduce cost and negative appendectomy rates. Both CT and ultrasound are also effective in the identification of causes of right lower quadrant pain unrelated to appendicitis. Among pediatric patients, the sensitivity and specificity of graded-compression ultrasound can approach those of CT, without the use of ionizing radiation. Performing MRI after inconclusive ultrasound in pregnant patients has been associated with sensitivity and specificity of 80% to 86% and 97% to 99%, respectively. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria(®) are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Max P Rosen
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
48
|
Abstract
Premenopausal women who present with acute pelvic pain frequently pose a diagnostic dilemma, exhibiting nonspecific signs and symptoms, the most common being nausea, vomiting, and leukocytosis. Diagnostic considerations encompass multiple organ systems, including obstetric, gynecologic, urologic, gastrointestinal, and vascular etiologies. The selection of imaging modality is determined by the clinically suspected differential diagnosis. Thus, a careful evaluation of such a patient should be performed and diagnostic considerations narrowed before a modality is chosen. Transvaginal and transabdominal pelvic sonography is the modality of choice when an obstetric or gynecologic abnormality is suspected, and computed tomography is more useful when gastrointestinal or genitourinary pathology is more likely. Magnetic resonance imaging, when available in the acute setting, is favored over computed tomography for assessing pregnant patients for nongynecologic etiologies because of the lack of ionizing radiation. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every two years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.
Collapse
|
|
49
|
Anderson SW, Soto JA. Multi-Detector Row CT of Acute Non-traumatic Abdominal Pain: Contrast and Protocol Considerations. Radiol Clin North Am 2012; 50:137-47. [DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2011.08.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/16/2022]
|
|
50
|
Gurian MS, Kovanlikaya A, Beneck D, Baron KT, John M, Brill PW. Radiologic–pathologic correlation in acute appendicitis: can we use it as a quality measure to assess interpretive accuracy of radiologists? Clin Imaging 2011; 35:421-3. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2011.01.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2010] [Accepted: 12/26/2010] [Indexed: 10/15/2022]
|