Background And Objectives: Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in general surgical practice. Alvarado scoring system is widely used for its diagnosis, but its performance has been reported to be suboptimal in the Asian population. Therefore, this study aims to compare the RIPASA scoring system with the Alvarado score to determine which serves as a better diagnostic tool for acute appendicitis in the Asian population. We enrolled 100 patients who Methods: presented with RIF pain in the study. Both the RIPASA and Alvarado scoring systems were applied to them. The final diagnosis was confirmed by HPE report and analyzed against both scoring systems. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy were calculated and compared for the RIPASA and Alvarado scoring systems. Of 100 patients, 70 were male and 30 were female. The mean age was 24.15 years. No significant differences were noted in terms of age, gender, presenting symptoms, or type of surgery performed. Sensitivity, specificity, Results: positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy were 91.67%, 35.23%, 16.18%, 96.88% and 42% respectively for Alvarado, 83.33%, 48.86%, 18.18%, 96.56% and 53% respectively for Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis. Area under the curve was 0.239 for Alvarado and 0.624 for Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis. RIPASA is a more sp Conclusion: ecific and accurate scoring system in Asian population, when compared to the Alvarado scoring system. It reduces the number of missed appendicitis cases.
Buddinni et al. (Fri,) studied this question.