Why the study?
Do scoring systems (Alvarado, Fenyo, Eskelinen, Ohman, Tzankis, RIPASA) improve diagnostic accuracy for acute appendicitis compared to clinical judgment alone in patients undergoing laparotomy?
Do scoring systems (Alvarado, Fenyo, Eskelinen, Ohman, Tzankis, RIPASA) improve diagnostic accuracy for acute appendicitis compared to clinical judgment alone in patients undergoing laparotomy?
Scoring systems for acute appendicitis have limited diagnostic value and should only be used as an adjunct to clinical judgment.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Scoring systems may aid appendicitis diagnosis as adjuncts; leaves open superiority over clinical judgment in reducing negative laparotomies.
UNLABELLED: Accurate diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA) is still a problem and is not always easy, even for experienced surgeons. Studies have shown that 20 to 30% of the appendices removedwere normal. Therefore, various scoring systems have been developed to aid in the diagnosis of doubtful cases and reduce the number of unnecessary appendectomies. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic value of different scoring systems in acute appendicitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study involved 94 patients who underwent laparotomy due to suspected acute appendicitis. Medical examination at hospital admission was performed by a resident and a general surgery specialist. The probability of AA was evaluated using six different scoring systems: Alvarado, Fenyo, Eskelinen, Ohman, Tzankis, and RIPASA. The resident calculated the results in individual systems. The decision to perform the operation was taken by a specialist surgeon who did not know the results. RESULTS: Normal appendix was removed in 26% of cases. Eskelinen, RIPASA and Alvarado systems showed highest sensitivity (99%, 88% and 85%, respectively). Tzankis and Fenyo systems showed highest specificity (62% and 50%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study has shown limited value of scoring systems for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. The systems may improve diagnostic accuracy as they require obtaining a more detailed medical history, and making a more thorough and organized data analysis. However, the scoring systems should be treated only as an aid to diagnosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Walczak et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: