scholarly journals The validity and utility of combining ultrasonography with different clinical scores in diagnosis of acute appendicitis

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 1084
Author(s):  
Ritika Agarwal ◽  
Abhinav Agarwal ◽  
Ashvini Kumar ◽  
Mukesh Kumar

Background: There are no controlled studies combining the use of either of the scores- Modified Alvarado, RIPASA or AIRS with ultrasonography. This study was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the existent clinical scoring systems in combination with ultrasound imaging in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in our patients.Methods: All patients with clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis and who underwent emergency appendectomy were included in the study. A detailed history of presenting illness was elicited and clinical examination, relevant blood investigations and abdominal ultrasonography were done. All patients were scored according to MAS, RIPASA and AIRS. Histopathology was taken as the gold standard.Results: The study included 118 patients. From our study population, 107 had acute appendicitis on histopathology. There was no statistically significant difference between the accuracy of MAS and RIPASA and both were equally good in diagnosing acute appendicitis as far as the diagnostic accuracy is concerned. Combined MAS, Combined RIPASA and Combined AIRS were obtained after combining ultrasonography findings with MAS, RIPASA score and AIRS respectively. The diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for Combined MAS were 96.6%, 99.1%, 72.7%, 97.2% and 88.9% respectively, for combined RIPASA were 95.8%, 99.1%, 63.6%, 96.4% and 87.5% respectively and for combined AIRS was 96.6%, 99.1%,72.7%, 97.2%, 88.9% respectively.Conclusions: If ultrasonography is used in conjunction with current clinical scoring systems then the diagnostic accuracy is enhanced. Therefore, USG should be done in all cases being evaluated for acute appendicitis; irrespective of the score being used.

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. 4378
Author(s):  
Ankur Varma ◽  
Aditi Varshney Varma ◽  
Jebin Joseph

Background: Acute appendicitis is a diagnostic dilemma for surgeons due to wide array of differential diagnosis and sometimes due to atypical presentation. Diagnosis using sonography, which is the most common modality, has a very low specificity and sensitivity. In such cases it puts a surgeon in dilemma especially in an emergency setting. The integration of clinical scores into the diagnostic process in acute appendicitis has been shown to improve decision making and reducing the negative appendectomy.Methods: This is a prospective observational study attempted to compare the efficiency of Alvarado and Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) score, in pre-operative diagnosis of acute appendicitis and to correlate these scores with histo-pathological diagnosis.100 cases satisfying inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected for study. Based on detailed history and thorough clinical examination, diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made.Results: Sensitivity for detecting acute appendicitis was found to be higher using RIPASA score. Negative appendectomy rate by RIPASA and Alvarado scoring systems were 11.5 and 19.2% meanwhile it was 12% with sonography.Conclusions: In the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, clinical scoring is a fast, simple, reliable, non-invasive, repeatable and safe diagnostic modality without extra expense and complications. This study shows RIPASA is a better scoring system than Alvarado in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.


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


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.


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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. 4006
Author(s):  
Praveena Suresh ◽  
Rajan Janardhanan ◽  
Deepak Paul

Background: Acute appendicitis is a common problem and can be difficult to diagnose at time. There are many scoring systems to predict the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. The most commonly used scoring system is Alvarado scoring system but, it is far from perfect. In this study we compare Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) scoring system to Alvarado scoring system in correctly diagnosing acute appendicitis.Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted in the department of general surgery, Sree Gokulam Medical College and Research Foundation. It comprised of 60 consecutive patients who were admitted with suspicion of appendicitis who had right iliac fossa pain. RIPASA and Alvarado scoring was done and compared to histopathology after surgery. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy was calculated.Results: Majority of the patients were below 30 years of age majority were males 36 (60%). When Alvarado score predicted appendicitis in 31 (51.77%) and RIPASA in 54 (90%). When the RIPASA score was >7.5 the sensitivity was 100%, specificity 67% and accuracy was 95%.Conclusions: RIPASA scoring system is more accurate to diagnose acute appendicitis especially when RIPASA score is >7.5. literatures.


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.


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
pp. 2806 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chenna Krishna Reddy Chada ◽  
Srikrishna Malepati ◽  
Jithendra Kandati ◽  
Sreeram Satish

Background: Acute appendicitis remains as one of the most common surgical entity requiring early intervention. Delay in management results in complications and misdiagnosis results in negative appendectomy. Hence there is always a need to develop a well-designed protocol for diagnosis and to reduce negative appendectomy. Alvarado score for diagnosis of acute appendicitis is an easy, affordable and diagnostic which has been evaluated early with variable reports. In cases with equivocal score, additional tools like sonography may provide a reliable result in accurate diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Objective of the study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of Alvarado score and ultrasonography in diagnosis of acute appendicitis. To determine the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of ultrasonography in cases operated with histopathological correlation.Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted at our hospital by department of general surgery for a period of six months. All suspected cases of appendicitis were scored by Alvarado score and cases with>5 were performed additional USG for further evaluation. All the cases of appendicitis that underwent surgery were further confirmed by histopathological correlation with USG and clinical Alvarado score.Results: A total of 200 cases were enrolled with male predominance (57.5%) and mean age of study group was 34.26±8.64 years and male to female ratio of 1.3:1.69% of cases presented with Alvarado score of 7 and above, while 21% of cases with 5-6. Migratory pain in RIF was the commonest symptom and tenderness RIF was the most common sign.160 cases (80%) were operated totally with 75% cases lap appendectomy and 25% cases by open appendectomy. USG was performed on 160 cases and 146 were positive and 14 were negative whereas histopathologically 142 cases were confirmed as Acute appendicitis. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of USG is 97.18%, 55.56%, 94.52% and 71.43%. The accuracy of USG is 92.5.Conclusions: Acute appendicitis is first and foremost a clinical diagnosis with scoring systems and imaging being necessary adjuncts in equivocal cases. USG is an easily available tool in diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Application of USG as adjunct tool to Alvarado scoring improves the diagnostic accuracy.


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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document