scholarly journals Comparison of RIPASA and Alvarado score in diagnosing acute appendicitis

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 740
Author(s):  
Suraj S. Kagwad ◽  
P. Karuppasamy

Background: Acute appendicitis is a common cause of abdominal pain and can be difficult to diagnose, especially during its early stages.  The diagnosis of acute appendicitis is based on clinical history, examination combined with investigations. The purpose of this study is to compare between the RIPASA score and Alvarado score in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. The aim of the present study was to compare the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of Alvarado and RIPASA score.Methods: The cases for the study will be sourced from cases admitted in SVMCH and RC, Puducherry during the period of November 2016 to June 2018.Results: Out of the 144 patients in our study 133 patients were diagnosed with acute appendicitis as per HPE report.As per our study, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV of RIPASA and Alvarado scoring system is 96.2%, 57.1%, 97.7% and 44.4%; 81.9%,85.7%, 95.1% and 20%  respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA score is 94.3 as compared to 82.1 of Alvarado score.Conclusions: The RIPASA scoring system is a promising and has good sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy when compared to Alvarado scoring for Asian Population.RIPASA scoring system is an easy and reliable, cost effective diagnostic tool which reduce negative appendicectomy rates and the expensive radiological investigations for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 3937
Author(s):  
Waleed Yusif El Sherpiny

Background: Various diagnostic criteria have been described for diagnosing acute appendicitis. Of these, Alvarado score has been the most commonly used. The RIPASA score is a new diagnostic scoring system developed for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and showed higher sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy as compared to Alvarado score. we want to compare prospectively Alvarado and RIPASA score by applying them to patients attending emergency department complaining of right iliac fossa pain that could probably be acute appendicitis.Methods: Patients with clinically suspected acute appendicitis were classified according to both Alvarado and RIPASA scoring systems before undergoing surgery. Histopathological examination of the removed appendix was taken as the gold standard for diagnosis of acute appendicitis.Results: Among (90%) patients had histologically confirmed appendicitis. With the cut-off value greater than 7.5 for RIPASA score; sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy  were 88.2%, 14.5%, 73.1%, 32%,and 68% respectively. With the cut-off value greater than 7 for Alvarado score, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy and negative appendectomy rates were 51.2%, 80 %, 91 %, 29%, and 57%, respectively. 87.5% of patients were correctly stratified by RIPASA under higher probability group while only 45% were classified by Alvarado as high probability.Conclusions: RIPASA scoring system showed high sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy in comparison to Alvarado scoring system. So, it can be applied   for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.


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.


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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Suman Baral ◽  
Neeraj Thapa ◽  
Raj Kumar Chhetri ◽  
Rupesh Sharma

Introduction: Various diagnostic criteria have been described for acute appendicitis. For decades the most commonly used one has been Alvarado score. RIPASA scoring system has also been developed for Asian population which has shown highest sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy. This study aimed to compare these two diagnostic criteria in Nepalese population attending a tertiary center. Methods: Patients with clinically suspected acute appendicitis were classified according to both Alvarado and RIPASA scoring systems before undergoing surgery. Histopathological examination was taken as the gold standard for diagnosis. Statistical analysis was done using McNemar's test as applicable. Results: Ninety nine (90 %) patients had histologically confirmed appendicitis. With the cut-off value greater than 7.5 for RIPASA score; sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy and negative appendectomy rates were 94.5%, 27.27 %, 92.16 %, 37.5 %, 88.18% and 7.84% respectively. With the cut-off value greater than 7 for Alvarado score, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy and negative appendectomy rates were 71.72%, 72.73 %, 95.95 %, 22.22%, 71.82 %, and 4.05 % respectively. 94.5% of patients were correctly stratified by RIPASA under higher probability group while only 71.8 % were classified by Alvarado (p value= 0.0001). Conclusion: RIPASA scoring system showed high sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy in comparison to Alvarado scoring system. So, this method can be applied in Nepalese setting for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.


2020 ◽  
pp. 39-41
Author(s):  
Shouryabrata Choudhury ◽  
Bhaskar Sharma ◽  
Neelanjana Paul

Background: Acute appendicitis is the most common cause of sudden abdominal pain requiring surgery. Prolong duration of symptoms before the surgical intervention increases the risk of morbidity and mortality due to perforation. There have been several scoring systems to help the decision making process to reach diagnosis of acute appendicitis. ALVARADO and modified ALVARADO are the two most commonly used system worldwide. This study is being done to assess the accuracy of the TZANAKIS SCORING SYSTEM and ALVARADO SCORING SYSTEM in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and reduce the rate of negative appendicectomy. Methodology: This was a hospital based prospective observational study conducted on patients admitted in the Department of General Surgery, Silchar Medical college and Hospital. This study was based on the analysis of 100 patients diagnosed to have acute appendicitis and underwent emergency open appendectomy from March 1st ,2020 – August 31st 2020. Aims and objectives: The aim of the present study is to assess the compare the accuracy of TAZANAKIS Scoring system and ALVARDO scoring system in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of Tzanakis score was 83.72, 78.57, 96.0 and 44.0 respectively and of Alvarado score was 65.11, 35.71, 86.1 and 14.28 respectively. Negative appendicectomy was 14%. Conclusion: Tzanakis scoring system is an effective scoring system to establish the accurate diagnosis of acute appendicitis and helps in reducing negative appendicectomy rate.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 935
Author(s):  
Jeevan G. Sanjive ◽  
Ravi H. Ramaiah

Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies. A delay in performing an appendicectomy in order to improve the diagnostic accuracy increases the risk of appendicular perforation and sepsis. We prospectively compared and validated RIPASA to Alvarado scoring system when applied to an Indian population.Methods: This study included all the patients presented in General Surgery and The Emergency Department of Manipal Hospital, Bangalore diagnosed to have acute appendicitis from October 2014 to March 2016. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), diagnostic accuracy, predicted negative appendicectomy and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the RIPASA and Alvarado scoring system were derived using SPSS statistical software.Results: 75 patients were included in the study. Using the RIPASA scoring system, 97.1% of patients who actually had acute appendicitis were correctly diagnosed, compared to only 52.85% when using the Alvarado scoring system. The sensitivity and the specificity of the RIPASA scoring system is 97.14% and 60% respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA scoring system is 94.67% and that of Alvarado scoring system is 52%. The results indicate that the RIPASA scoring system is a better diagnostic tool for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis (p<0.001).Conclusions: It is observed that the RIPASA scoring system has higher sensitivity and higher specificity compared to Alvarado scoring. It also has higher diagnostic accuracy and consequently, it has low negative appendicectomy rate. It can be concluded that the RIPASA scoring can be effectively conducted for the better evaluation of acute appendicitis.


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (9) ◽  
pp. 3067
Author(s):  
Vidur Jyoti ◽  
Akhilesh Kumar ◽  
Preeti Yadav ◽  
Vaibhav Kapoor

Background: Scoring systems are valuable and valid for discriminating between acute appendicitis and nonspecific abdominal pain. Alvarado scoring is classical and different modifications of Alvarado score have been introduced but none is ideal and negative appendicectomy rate is still high. The aim of the study is to design a more reliable scoring system which is cost effective, simple, easy to learn, high accuracy, which can be applied by any doctor at any health care facility.Methods: Retrospective study of 160 patients hospitalized with abdominal pain suggestive of acute appendicitis and subsequently operated over a period of 5 year from January 2012 to January 2017 at Max Super Speciality Hospital, Gurgaon.Results: In the present study based on six clinically most significant variables, a diagnostic accuracy of 96.25% was achieved while the same was 85% for classical Alvardo Score. This significantly increased the diagnostic accuracy and lowered the negative appendicectomy rate.Conclusions: Max Appendicitis Score is perfect scoring system for diagnosing appendicitis, it can be specially very handy in peripheral health centers where radiological facilities are sparse.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 1954
Author(s):  
Sailendra Nath Paul ◽  
Dilip Kumar Das

Background: Timely diagnosis and intervention of acute appendicitis reduces morbidity and mortality associated with the disease condition. The study aimed to evaluate the etiology of acute appendicitis, to analyze the sensitivity of modified Alvarado scoring system and radiology in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and to correlate the observations of laboratory tests, operative findings with the histopathological report of specimen of appendix.Methods: This was a prospective study done on 100 patients with clinical symptoms of acute right lower abdominal pain suggestive of appendicular origin during the period from February 2015 to January 2016 in the department of surgery thorough clinical assessment, laboratory investigations, ultrasound findings as were done for all patients. After confirming the diagnosis of AA the patients had operative intervention and specimens were sent for histopathological study.Results: Male preponderance was seen in the study. Majority of them belongs to 21 to 30 years age group (50%). Faecolith was the most common etiological factor observed (58%). Abdominal pain (100%) was the most common clinical symptom. Alvarado score had sensitivity of 95.74% and specificity of 66.67% in diagnosing AA. In correlation to histopathological findings, ultrasonography findings showed 100% positive visualization rate in all 71 cases. Elevated ESR (94%) had high diagnostic accuracy as confirmed by HPE finding (96.81%) which is statistically significant (p<0.000).Conclusions: Alvarado scoring system, elevated ESR levels and USG findings of the appendix can be considered as adjuncts to clinically diagnose the AA, to improve the diagnostic accuracy thereby consequently the rate of negative appendicectomy can be reduced and thus decreases the complication rates.


1969 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 151-155
Author(s):  
Imtiaz Ahmad Khattak ◽  
Waleed Mabood ◽  
Muhammad Naeem ◽  
Sohaib Ali ◽  
Muhammad Adnan Khan Khattak

Background: Among acute emergencies, the most commonly occurring one is Acute appendicitis. Scoring systems have beendeveloped such as Alvarado and Modified Alvarado Scores. RIPASA Score has a higher sensitivity in the Asian population set.Thus, came about the plan of our examination to try things out with this new score and to check whether it undoubtedly performswellto the undertaking.Objectives To determine the sensitivity, specificity of the 16-point RIPASA scoring system in diagnosing suspected acuteappendicitis and its validationin correlation with histopathology.Material and Methods: The study was carried out in Khyber Teaching Hospital Peshawar Pakistan from January 2018 to June2018, Department of General Surgery. A total of 322 patients were included in the study. In ED, resident surgeons filled in theRIPASA Score proforma by taking a detailed history and doing a physical examination, and running labs along withultrasonography. The decisionto perform appendectomy was solelytaken bythe senior registrar which was the final decision andthe sample was sent forH/P later on.Results: Of the 322, patients who went through the surgery for acute appendicitis, 188 (58.4%) were male and 134 (41.6%) werefemale, 284(88.2%) had positive histopathology reports and 38 (11.8%) had a negative report. The sensitivity of the RIPASA Scoreat a cut-off value of 8.0 was 97.98%,with the specificity of 77%, and Positive Predictive value of 97.52%,and a Negative PredictiveValue of 86.3%.Conclusion: The clinical implication of RIPASA score is found to be more beneficial than the traditional Alvarado scoring system,thus could bringthe complications rates of appendectomy to significantly lowerfigures.Keywords: Acute Appendicitis,Alvarado Score,RIPASA Score,AsianPopulation, Sensitivity, Specificity


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document