This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (71)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Gastrointestinal/ Upper Foregut  • Diagnosis  • Gastrointestinal Diseases  • Alert me on articles by topic

John G. Schuler, MD; Michael J. Shortsleeve, MD; Richard S. Goldenson, MD; Jeanette M. Perez-Rossello, MD; Robin A. Perlmutter, MD; Amy Thorsen, MD

Arch Surg. 1998;133:373-377.

Objective  To better define the effectiveness of abdominal computed tomographic scanning (ACTS) in adult patients with suspected appendicitis.

Design  Retrospective analysis.

Setting  A community teaching hospital.

Patients  Ninety-seven patients with appendicitis in the differential diagnosis, whose clinical findings were insufficient to perform surgery or to discharge from the hospital, during a 14-month period.

Interventions  None.

Main Outcome Measures  Accuracy of ACTS, rate of appendectomies that show no appendicitis (negative appendectomy rate), and frequency of ACTS as a definitive diagnostic test.

Results  Forty-nine of the 50 patients with appendicitis were correctly diagnosed by ACTS. Forty-three of the 47 patients without appendicitis were correctly diagnosed by ACTS. Positive predictive value was 92%, negative predictive value was 98%, and accuracy was 96%. The ACTS group had a negative appendectomy rate of 5.8% (3/52), lower than the hospital rate of 14% for the preceding 3 years. The ACTS established an alternative diagnosis in 16 patients, allowed 10 other patients to be discharged early or not admitted, and was the critical diagnostic test in 30 of the patients with appendicitis. Therefore, the ACTS played a definitive role in the treatment of 56 (57.7%) of the 97 patients.

Conclusions  The ACTS was an accurate test in the diagnosis of appendicitis and was of significant benefit in 57.7% of the patients studied. However, it was difficult to predict which patients were most likely to benefit. Expanded selective use of ACTS for patients with clinically indeterminate appendicitis may result in a lower negative appendectomy rate and fewer patient admissions for observation.

From the Departments of Surgery (Drs Schuler and Thorsen) and Radiology (Drs Shortsleeve, Goldenson, Perez-Rossello, and Perlmutter), Mount Auburn Hospital, Cambridge, Mass.

RELATED ARTICLE

Is There a Role for Abdominal Computed Tomographic Scans in Appendicitis?—Invited Commentary
Jack Pickleman
Arch Surg. 1998;133(4):377.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Impact of helical computed tomography in clinically evident appendicitis
Kim et al.
Emerg. Med. J. 2008;25:477-481.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

US or CT for Diagnosis of Appendicitis in Children and Adults? A Meta-Analysis
Doria et al.
Radiology 2006;241:83-94.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

CT and Sonography for Suspected Acute Appendicitis: A Commentary.
Jacobs
Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006;186:1094-1096.
FULL TEXT  

The Status of Appendiceal CT in an Urban Medical Center 5 Years After Its Introduction: Experience with 753 Patients
Rhea et al.
Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005;184:1802-1808.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Frequency of Visualization and Thickness of Normal Appendix at Nonenhanced Helical CT
Benjaminov et al.
Radiology 2002;225:400-406.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Imaging for Suspected Appendicitis: Negative Appendectomy and Perforation Rates
Bendeck et al.
Radiology 2002;225:131-136.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Imaging of appendicitis: a cautionary note
Shorvon
Br. J. Radiol. 2002;75:717-720.
FULL TEXT  

Diagnostic value of unenhanced helical CT in adult patients with suspected acute appendicitis
Ege et al.
Br. J. Radiol. 2002;75:721-725.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Acute Appendicitis: Comparison of Helical CT Diagnosis—Focused Technique with Oral Contrast Material versus Nonfocused Technique with Oral and Intravenous Contrast Material
Jacobs et al.
Radiology 2001;220:683-690.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Computed Tomography and Ultrasonography in the Diagnosis of Appendicitis: When Are They Indicated?
Wilson et al.
Arch Surg 2001;136:670-675.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Evaluation of Suspected Appendicitis in Children Using Limited Helical CT and Colonic Contrast Material
Mullins et al.
Am. J. Roentgenol. 2001;176:37-41.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Case 21-2000- A 13-Year-Old Boy with Genital Edema and Abdominal Pain
Tracy and Graeme-Cooke
NEJM 2000;343:127-133.
FULL TEXT  

Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: Comparison of 5- and 10-mm CT Sections in the Same Patient
Weltman et al.
Radiology 2000;216:172-177.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Appendicitis at the Millennium
Birnbaum and Wilson
Radiology 2000;215:337-348.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Helical Computed Tomography in Differentiating Appendicitis and Acute Gynecologic Conditions
RAO et al.
Obstet Gynecol 1999;93:417-421.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT