scholarly journals DIAGNOSTIC EFFICACY OF MODIFIED ALVARADO SCORE OVER GRADDED COMPRESSION ULTRASONOGRAPHY

2013 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 105-108
Author(s):  
Caren Dsouza ◽  
John Martis ◽  
Vinay Vaidyanathan

Abstract Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the commonest surgical emergencies. Despite a life time cumulative risk of nearly 7% its diagnosis remains a challenge. The risks of two primary outcomes must be balanced in the management of presumed appendicitis: perforation and misdiagnosis.The rate of misdiagnosis in certain populations is as high as 40%. Diagnostic aids like modified Alvarado score and ultrasonography can dramatically reduce the negative appendicectomies. Methods:Data was collected from 60 patients with complains of right iliac fossa pain over a period of 9 months to our hospital. All patients were categorised using the Alvarado score and Graded compression ultrasonography was done. The preoperative and histological findings were compared with the preoperative diagnosis. The collected data was analysed with regards to various parameters like sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and diagnostic accuracy. Results:In our study of 60 patients, 56 patients underwent appendicectomy out of which a histological confirmation of appendicitis was obtained for 50 patients, giving a negative appendicectomy rate of 12%.By taking a cut-off point of 7 for the Modified Alvarado score, a sensitivity of 97.56%, specificity of 66.67%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 95.23%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 80% and accuracy of 87.2% were calculated. Using the cut-off point of 6, a sensitivity of 90% specificity of 50%, PPV of 69.23%, NPV of 80% and accuracy of 55.56% were obtained. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy rate of ultrasonography was 92.15%, 88.9%, 97.19%, 66.7% and 85%, respectively. Conclusion:The presence of a modified Alvarado score > 7 was found to be a dependable aid in the preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis. In cases where the score was negative or equivocal, ultrasonography greatly helped in the diagnosis thereby reducing the incidence of negative appendicectomies.

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 796
Author(s):  
Vamsavardhan Pasumarthi ◽  
C. P. Madhu

Background: The RIPASA Score is a new diagnostic scoring system developed for the diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis which showed higher sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy compared to ALVARADO Score, particularly when applied to Asian population. Not many studies have been conducted to compare RIPASA and ALVARADO scoring systems. Hence, author want to compare prospectively Alvarado and RIPASA score by applying them to the patients attending the hospital with right iliac fossa pain that could probably be acute appendicitis.Methods: A prospective analysis of 116 cases admitted with RIF pain during a 2 years period was performed. Patients between 15-60 years were scored as per Alvarado and RIPASA scoring system. Histopathological reports of the cases were collected and compared with the scores. ROC curve area analysis was performed to examine diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA and ALVARADO scores.Results: The sensitivity of ALVARADO score is estimated to be 52.08 for a cut off of 6. The specificity is 80%, positive predictive value is 92.59, negative predictive value is 25.81. The Diagnostic accuracy of ALVARADO scoring is found to be 56.9. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive values of RIPASA scoring system are 75%, 65%, 91.14%, 35.14%. The diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA score is 73.28.Conclusions: The difference in the diagnostic accuracy between ALVARADO and RIPASA scoring system is significant indicating that the RIPASA score is a much better diagnostic tool for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. When the ROC curve was observed the area under the curve is high for RIPASA scoring system.


Author(s):  
Lesni Untono ◽  
Sigit Adi Prasetyo ◽  
Ignatius Riwanto

Background: The diagnosis of acute appendicitis must be performed quickly and accurately to reduce the risk of negative appendectomy without increasing the risk of perforation. Objective: To analyze whether Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio (NL-R) in the modified Alvarado score is more accurate in diagnosing acute appendicitis in comparison with total leukocyte and neutrophil. Method: This was a cross-sectional study and the data were collected from Telogorejo Hospital Semarang (Indonesia) from November 2018 until October 2019. The best cut-off point of NL-R for predicting acute appendicitis was provided through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. NL-R was used to replace total leukocyte and neutrophil to form a modified Alvarado score. Area Under Curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the original Alvarado Score and modified Alvarado score were measured. Results: Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value of the original Alvarado score are 100%, 84.6%, 91.3%, and 100% respectively with cut-off point total score of >4.5. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value of modified Alvarado score were 100%, 100%, 100%, and 100% respectively with cut-off point total score of >5.5. AUC modified Alvarado Score was 1.000 and AUC original Alvarado Score was 0.985. Conclusion: Modified Alvarado score diagnoses acute appendicitis more accurately than the original Alvarado Score.


Author(s):  
S. Keerthana ◽  
. Vignaradj

Background: Acute appendicitis can be diagnosed much accurately by using Modified Alvarado score and Ultrasound together in the clinical setting. Objectives: Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of Modified Alvarado score and Ultrasonographic findings in acute appendicitis. Materials and Methods: A total of 200 patients of age group ranging from 4-65 years, both male and female, who visited the tertiary health care center with clinical features suggestive of acute appendicitis were randomly selected. Data from the patients regarding their Modified Alvarado score, ultrasonographic findings and histopathological reports were collected for the study. Statistical analysis was performed for the results of both Modified Alvarado score and Ultrasonographic findings in contrast to the pathology reports.  Results: The study included 200 patients, with maximum incidence of acute appendicitis seen in males (70.5%) and among 21-30 age groups (40.5%). The sensitivity, specificity of Modified Alvarado Score was 89.47% and 73.33%, with Positive Predictive Value, Negative Predictive Value and diagnostic accuracy being 40%, 73.33% and 45% respectively. Ultrasonography revealed 89.58% sensitivity, 15.62 % specificity, Positive predictive value and NPV were 75.88% and 50%, and diagnostic accuracy was 72%. The negative appendectomies rates accounted to 15%. Conclusion: It is advised that both Modified Alvarado score and Ultrasound can be used to together to diagnose acute appendicitis. This can be useful in decreasing the negative appendectomies and hence reduce the morbidity and mortality.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 944
Author(s):  
Kodenge Raghavendra Rao ◽  
D. Navya Sesha Harika ◽  
Suragani V. Narayana ◽  
Vinodh Kumar K. S. ◽  
Chavala Pavan Kumar Yadav ◽  
...  

Background: Acute Appendicitis is common surgical emergencies with a lifetime prevalence of approximately 1 in 7. Despite advances in diagnosis and treatment; acute Appendicitis is still associated with morbidity (10%) and mortality (1-5 %). Presentations of acute Appendicitis can mimic various acute medical and surgical conditions, and the diagnosis is predominantly a clinical one-different scoring systems used for aiding in early diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis and its prompt management. Alvarado score and RIPASA score are the most popular ones. So we retrospectively applied and compared Alvarado and RIPASA score in the diagnosis of acute Appendicitis in Indian population.Methods: In this study, we compared RIPASA score and Alvarado scoring system retrospectively by applying to 74 patients. This study period from November 2018 to March 2020. Both scores were calculated for patients presented with right iliac fossa pain. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive (NPV), diagnostic accuracy for RIPASA and Alvarado system was calculated.Results: The sensitivity and specificity of the Alvarado score were 85.07% and 57.14% respectively. The sensitivity & specificity of RIPASA score were 91.04% and 71.42% respectively. Accuracy of the Alvarado scoring system is 82.44% and for RIPASA scoring system is 89.18%. The results show that the RIPASA scoring system is a better diagnostic tool for the diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis.Conclusions: RIPASA scoring system is simple, accurate, convenient, and more specific scoring system than the modified Alvarado scoring system for the Indian population.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 111
Author(s):  
Shipra Sharma ◽  
Ankit Soni ◽  
Sanjay Kumar ◽  
Manoj Poptani

Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the commonest surgical emergencies. But confirming the diagnosis of acute appendicitis is still a subjective issue for clinicians. Modified Alvarado score is based on clinical and laboratory findings which is scored upto 9. Management of 5 to 7 modified Alvarado score came under equivocal. Either may be conservative or operative.Methods: We augmented the modified Alvarado score with abdominal ultrasound in diagnosis of acute appendicitis.Results: Outcomes were evaluated in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and negative appendicectomy rate, results of our study are sensitivity 95.7%, specificity is 76.92%, PPV 93.75% and NPV 33.34%.Conclusions: Overall increased sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV of the augmented approach is useful for diagnosis of acute appendicitis which scored under 5-7 of modified Alvarado scoring system.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 853
Author(s):  
Manoj Poptani ◽  
Ankit Soni ◽  
Shipra Sharma ◽  
Sanjay Kumar

Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the commonest surgical emergencies. But confirming the diagnosis of acute appendicitis is still a subjective issue for clnicians. Modified Alvarado score is based on clinical and laboratory findings which is scored upto. Management of 5 to 7 modified Alvarado score came under equivocal. Either may be conservative or operative.Methods: We augmented the modified alvarado score with abdominal ultrasound in diagnosis of acute appendicitis.Results: Outcomes were evaluated in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and negative appendicectomy rate, results of our study are sensitivity 95.7%, specificity is 76.92%, PPV 93.75% and NPV 33.34%.Conclusions: Overall increased sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV of the augmented approach is useful for diagnosis of acute appendicitis which scored under 5-7 of modified alvarado scoring system.  


2021 ◽  
pp. 25-28
Author(s):  
M. Vijaya Kumar ◽  
Manasa Manasa

Acute appendicitis is the most common condition encountered in the Emergency department .Alvarado and Modied Alvarado scores are the most commonly used scoring system used for diagnosing acute appendicitis.,but its performance has been found to be poor in certain population . Hence our aim was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA and ALVARADO Scoring system and study and compare sensitivity, specicity and predictive values of these scoring systems. The study was conducted in Government district hospital Nandyal . We enrolled 176 patients who presented with RIF pain . Both RIPASA and ALVARADO were applied to them. Final diagnosis was conrmed either by CT scan, intra operative nding or post operative HPE report. Sensitivity,specicity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy was calculated both for RIPASA and ALVARADO. It was found that sensitivity and specicity of the RIPASA score in our study are 98.7% and 83.3%, respectively. PPV and NPV were 98.1% and 88.2% and sensitivity and specicity of the Alvardo score in our study are 94.3% and 83.3%, respectively. PPV and NPV were 98% and 62.5%.Diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA score and Alvarado score are 97% and 93% respectively. RIPASA is a more specic and accurate scoring system in our local population when compared to ALVARADO . It reduces the number of missed appendicitis cases and also convincingly lters out the group of patients that would need a CT scan for diagnosis (score 5-7.5 ) BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis is one of the most commonly dealt surgical emergencies, with a lifetime prevalence rate of approximately 1 one in seven. The incidence is 1.5–1.9 per 1,000 in the male and female population, and is approximately 1.4 times greater in men than in women. Despite being a common problem, it remains a difcult diagnosis to establish, particularly among the young, the elderly and females of reproductive age, where a host of other genitourinary and gynaecological inammatory conditions can present with signs and symptoms that are 2 similar to those of acute appendicitis. A delay in performing an appendectomy in order to improve its diagnostic accuracy increases the risk of appendicular perforation and peritonitis, which in turn increases morbidity and mortality. A variable combination of clinical signs and symptoms has been used together with laboratory ndings in several scoring systems proposed for suggesting the probability of Acute Appendicitis and the possible subsequent management pathway. The Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) and ALVARADO score are new diagnostic scoring systems developed for the diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis and has been shown to have signicantly higher sensitivity, specicity and diagnostic accuracy. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES PRIMARY OBJECT 1. To compare RIPASA Scoring system and ALVARADO Scoring system in terms of diagnostic accuracy in Acute Appendicitis. 2. To study and compare sensitivity, specicity and predictive values of above scoring systems. SECONDARY OBJECT 1. To study the rate of negative appendicectomy based on above scoring systems. CONCLUSION: The RIPASA score is a simple scoring system with high sensitivity and specicity for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. The 14 clinical parameters are all present in a good clinical history and examination and can be easily and quickly applied. Therefore, a decision on the management can be made early. Although the RIPASA score was developed for the local population of Brunei, we believe that it should be applicable to other regions. The RIPASA score presents greater Diagnostic accuracy and Sensitivity and equal specicity as a diagnostic test compared to the Alvarado score and is helpful in making appropriate therapeutic decisions. In hospitals like ours, the diagnosis of AA relies greatly on the clinical evaluation performed by surgeons. An adequate clinical scoring system would avoid diagnostic errors, maintaining a satisfactory low rate of negative appendectomies by adequate patient stratication, while limiting patient exposure to ionizing radiation, since 21 there is an increased risk of developing cancer with computed tomography, particularly for the paediatric age group.


Diagnostics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ukweh ◽  
Ugbem ◽  
Okeke ◽  
Ekpo

Background: Ultrasound is operator-dependent, and its value and efficacy in fetal morphology assessment in a low-resource setting is poorly understood. We assessed the value and efficacy of fetal morphology ultrasound assessment in a Nigerian setting. Materials and Methods: We surveyed fetal morphology ultrasound performed across five facilities and followed-up each fetus to ascertain the outcome. Fetuses were surveyed in the second trimester (18th–22nd weeks) using the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) guideline. Clinical and surgical reports were used as references to assess the diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound in livebirths, and autopsy reports to confirm anomalies in terminated pregnancies, spontaneous abortions, intrauterine fetal deaths, and still births. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, Area under the curve (AUC), Youden index, likelihood ratios, and post-test probabilities. Results: In total, 6520 fetuses of women aged 15–46 years (mean = 31.7 years) were surveyed. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 77.1 (95% CI: 68–84.6), 99.5 (95% CI: 99.3–99.7), and 88.3 (95% CI: 83.7–92.2), respectively. Other performance metrics were: positive predictive value, 72.4 (95% CI: 64.7–79.0), negative predictive value, 99.6 (95% CI: 99.5–99.7), and Youden index (77.1%). Abnormality prevalence was 1.67% (95% CI: 1.37–2.01), and the positive and negative likelihood ratios were 254 (95% CI: 107.7–221.4) and 0.23 (95% CI: 0.16–0.33), respectively. The post-test probability for positive test was 72% (95% CI: 65–79). Conclusion: Fetal morphology assessment is valuable in a poor economics setting, however, the variation in the diagnostic efficacy across facilities and the limitations associated with the detection of circulatory system anomalies need to be addressed.


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (12) ◽  
pp. 3924
Author(s):  
Murhari D. Gaikwad ◽  
Anand Auti ◽  
Avinash Magare

Background: To evaluate and compare diagnostic accuracy of modified Alvarado score and ultrasonography in co-relation to histopathology report for diagnosis of acute appendicitis.Methods: A prospective study of the patients who underwent appendectomy for suspected acute appendicitis at IIMS and R Medical College and Noor Hospital Warudi, Badnapur, Dist. Jalna (Maharashtra). The clinical (radiological) and ultrasonography data of 760 patients with suspected appendicitis was collected between March 2014 to Feb. 2017. These patients were evaluated by modified Alvarado score and ultrasonographically, which was corrected with histopathological finding.Results: Out of 760 patients 69.34% had acute appendicitis 63.81% had modified Alvarado score≥7 and 58.28% patients were ultrasonographically positive. In present study modified Alvarado score has sensitivity of 89.37% specificity 93.99% positive predictive value 97.11%, negative predictive value 79.64%, diagnostic accuracy of 81.32%.Conclusions: Modified Alvarado score can be used effectively in clinical decision making. When compare with ultrasonography neither one is advantageous. However, additional information provided by ultrasonography improves diagnostic accuracy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 71 (5) ◽  
pp. 1519-23
Author(s):  
Muhammad Majid ◽  
Rasikh Maqsood ◽  
Muhammad Ali ◽  
Muhammad Ayub Ashraf Malhi ◽  
Zaki Hussain ◽  
...  

Objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of Alvarado score and the RIPASA score for acute appendicitis using histopathology as a gold standard. Study Design: Cross sectional validation study. Place and Duration of Study: Department of General Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi Pakistan, from Mar to Sep 2018. Methodology: A total number of 270 patients were included in the study presenting with pain right iliac fossa to the Accident and Emergency department. Surgeons and Seniors Residents in Surgery on call in the Accident and Emergency Department. Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi, scored the patients with suspicion of acute appendicitis with Alvarado Score and RIPASA score simultaneously. After appendectomy of these patients, the removed appendix was sent for histopathology to confirm whether it was normal or inflamed. A 2x2 table was used for calculating sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of the RIPASA score and Alvarado Score. The two scoring systems were then compared for diagnostic accuracy. Results: In our study, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA score and Alvarado score for diagnosing acute appendicitis were 92.1%, 62.1%, 95.2%, 48.6%, 88.9% and 72.6%, 68.9%, 95.1%, 23.2%, 72.2% respectively. Conclusion: The diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA score was more than that of Alvarado score in diagnosing acute appendicitis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document