You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 139 No. 5, May 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Paper
 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 (10)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Gastrointestinal Diseases
 •Gastrointestinal/ Upper Foregut
 •Computed Tomography
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Advantages of Focused Helical Computed Tomographic Scanning With Rectal Contrast Only vs Triple Contrast in the Diagnosis of Clinically Uncertain Acute Appendicitis

A Prospective Randomized Study

Vijay K. Mittal, MD; Jason Goliath, MD; Mubashir Sabir, MD; Rakesh Patel, MD; Boyd F. Richards, BS; Idan Alkalay, MD; Stephen ReMine, MD; Michael Edwards, MD

Arch Surg. 2004;139:495-500.

Hypothesis  Focused helical computed tomographic (CT) scanning with rectal contrast only is a superior diagnostic modality compared with the traditional triple-contrast CT scan for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Design  Prospective randomized analysis of both CT scan modalities.

Interventions  Only patients with uncertain diagnosis of acute appendicitis were entered in the study. The patients were then randomized to undergo the traditional triple-contrast CT scan or the new focused CT scan with rectal contrast only. Surgical management included operation or observation for 23 hours.

Results  Ninety-one patients participated in the study, including 52 in the triple-contrast group and 39 in the rectal-contrast group. The demographics of the triple-contrast vs the rectal-contrast groups were similar. The triple-contrast group had a sensitivity of 97%, specificity of 86%, positive predictive value of 90%, and negative predictive value of 93%. The rectal-contrast group had a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 100%, positive predictive value of 100%, and negative predictive value of 100%. There were 4 false-positive findings and 1 false-negative finding in the triple-contrast group compared with none in the rectal-contrast group. In the triple-contrast group, there were 13 perforated appendixes compared with 1 in the rectal-contrast group. The cost of a triple-contrast scan was $620 compared with $305 for a focused rectal-contrast scan. The negative appendectomy rate for the study was 8.0% (4 of 48 patients in the triple-contrast group vs 3 of 39 in the rectal-contrast group).

Conclusions  The demographics, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were comparable in both groups. The focused rectal-contrast procedure was better tolerated by patients and demonstrated decreased morbidity, delay to diagnosis, perforation rate, and negative appendectomy rate with no missed diagnosis and decreased cost. Therefore, we believe that focused helical CT scanning with rectal contrast only is a superior diagnostic modality compared with the traditional triple-contrast CT scan for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.


From the Departments of Surgery (Drs Mittal, Goliath, Sabir, and ReMine and Mr Richards) and Radiology (Drs Patel, Alkalay, and Edwards), Providence Hospital and Medical Centers, Southfield, Mich.


RELATED ARTICLE

This Month in Archives of Surgery
Arch Surg. 2004;139(5):465.
FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Imaging investigation of acute right iliac fossa pain
Anderson and Bungay
Imaging 2006;18:257-267.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Other articles noted
Evid. Based Med. 2004;9:e5-e5.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2004 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.