Bedside ultrasonography as an adjunct to routine evaluation of acute appendicitis in the emergency department

Samuel H F Lam, Anthony Grippo, Chistopher Kerwin, P John Konicki, Diana Goodwine, Michael J Lambert, Samuel H F Lam, Anthony Grippo, Chistopher Kerwin, P John Konicki, Diana Goodwine, Michael J Lambert

Abstract

Introduction: Appendicitis is a common condition presenting to the emergency department (ED). Increasingly emergency physicians (EP) are using bedside ultrasound (BUS) as an adjunct diagnostic tool. Our objective is to investigate the test characteristics of BUS for the diagnosis of appendicitis and identify components of routine ED workup and BUS associated with the presence of appendicitis.

Methods: Patients four years of age and older presenting to the ED with suspected appendicitis were eligible for enrollment. After informed consent was obtained, BUS was performed on the subjects by trained EPs who had undergone a minimum of one-hour didactic training on the use of BUS to diagnose appendicitis. They then recorded elements of clinical history, physical examination, white blood cell count (WBC) with polymophonuclear percentage (PMN), and BUS findings on a data form. We ascertained subject outcomes by a combination of medical record review and telephone follow-up.

Results: A total of 125 subjects consented for the study, and 116 had adequate image data for final analysis. Prevalence of appendicitis was 40%. Mean age of the subjects was 20.2 years, and 51% were male. BUS was 100% sensitive (95% CI 87-100%) and 32% specific (95% CI 14-57%) for detection of appendicitis, with a positive predictive value of 72% (95% CI 56-84%), and a negative predictive value of 100% (95% CI 52-100%). Assuming all non-diagnostic studies were negative would yield a sensitivity of 72% and specificity of 81%. Subjects with appendicitis had a significantly higher occurrence of anorexia, nausea, vomiting, and a higher WBC and PMN count when compared to those without appendicitis. Their BUS studies were significantly more likely to result in visualization of the appendix, appendix diameter >6mm, appendix wall thickness >2 mm, periappendiceal fluid, visualization of the appendix tip, and sonographic Mcburney's sign (p<0.05). In subjects with diagnostic BUS studies, WBC, PMN, visualization of appendix, appendix diameter >6 mm, appendix wall thickness >2 mm, periappendiceal fluid were found to be predictors of appendicitis on logistic regression.

Conclusion: BUS is moderately useful for appendicitis diagnosis. We also identified several components in routine ED workup and BUS that are associated with appendicitis generating hypothesis for future studies.

References

    1. Addiss DG, Shaffer N, Fowler BS, et al. The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol. 1990;132:910–25.
    1. Bundy DG, Byerly JS, Liles EA, et al. Does this child have appendicitis? JAMA. 2007;298:438–51.
    1. Riesenman PJ, Riesenman KP, Stone TJ, et al. Nonfocused enhanced CT evaluation of acute appendicitis increases length of stay in the emergency department but does not increase perforation rate. Am Surg. 2008;74:488–92.
    1. Nelson KA, Boslaugh SE, Hodge D., 3d Risk factors for extremely long length-of-stay among pediatric emergency patients. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2009;25:835–40.
    1. Elikashvili I, Tay ET, Tsung JW. The effect of point-of-care ultrasonography on emergency department length of stay and computed tomography utilization in children with suspected appendicitis. Acad Emerg Med. 2014;21:163–70.
    1. Alvarado A. A practical score for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Ann Emerg Med. 1986;15:557–64.
    1. Ohmann C, Franke C, Yang Q. Clinical benefit of a diagnostic score for appendicitis: results of a prospective international study. Arch Surg. 1999;134:993–96.
    1. Enochsson L, Gudbjartsson T, Hellberg A, et al. The Fenyö-Lindberg scoring system for appendicitis increases positive predictive value in fertile women--a prospective study in 455 patients randomized to either laparoscopic or open appendectomy. Surg Endosc. 2004;18:1509–13.
    1. Dado G, Anania G, Baccarani U, et al. Application of a clinical score for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in childhood: a retrospective analysis of 197 patients. J Pediatr Surg. 2000;35:1320–22.
    1. Samuel M. Pediatric appendicitis score. J Pediatr Surg. 2002;37:877–81.
    1. van den Broek WT, van der Ende ED, Bijnen AB, et al. Which children could benefit from additional diagnostic tools in case of suspected appendicitis? J Pediatr Surg. 2004;39:570–54.
    1. Kharbanda AB, Taylor GA, Fishman SJ, et al. A clinical decision rule to identify children at low risk for appendicitis. Pediatrics. 2005;116:709–16.
    1. Kharbanda AB, Dudley NC, Bajaj L, et al. Validation and refinement of a prediction rule to identify children at low risk for acute appendicitis. Arch Pediatr Adolsc Med. 2012;166:738–44.
    1. Ohle R, O’Reilly F, O’Brien K, et al. The Alvarado score for predicting acute appendicitis: a systemic review. BMC Med. 2011;9:139.
    1. Chen SC, Wang HP, Hsu HY, et al. Accuracy of ED sonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Am J Emerg Med. 2000;18:449–52.
    1. Fox JC, Hunt MJ, Zlidenny AM, et al. Retrospective analysis of emergency department ultrasound for acute appendicitis. Cal J Emerg Med. 2007;8:41–5.
    1. Fox JC, Solley M, Anderson CL, et al. Prospective evaluation of emergency physician performed bedside ultrasound to detect acute appendicitis. Eur J Emerg Med. 2008;15:80–5.
    1. Rosen MP, Ding A, Blake MA, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® right lower quadrant pain—suspected appendicitis. J Am Coll Radiol. 2011;8:749–55.
    1. Goldin AB, Khanna P, Thapa M, et al. Revised criteria for appendicitis in children improve diagnostic accuracy. Pedaitr Radiol. 2011;41:993–99.
    1. Kessler N, Cyteval C, Gallix B, et al. Appendicitis: evaluation of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of US, Doppler US and laboratory findings. Radiology. 2004;230:472–78.
    1. Je BK, Kim SB, Lee SH, et al. Diagnostic value of maximal-outer-diameter and maximal mural-mural-thickness in use of ultrasound for acute appendicitis in children. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15:2900–03.
    1. Van Randen A, Lameris W, van Es HW, et al. Profiles of US and CT imaging features with a high probability of appendicitis. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:1657–66.
    1. Soda K, Nemoto K, Yoshizawa S, et al. Detection of pinpoint tenderness on the appendix under ultrasonography is useful to confirm acute appendicitis. Arch Surg. 2001;136:1136–40.
    1. Franke C, Bohner H, Yang Q, et al. Ultrasonography for diagnosis of acute appendicitis: results of a prospective multicenter trial. Acute Abdominal Pain Study Group. World J Surg. 1999;23:141–46.
    1. Terasawa T, Blackmore CC, Brent S, et al. Systemic review: computed tomography and ultrasonography to detect acute appendicitis in adults and adolescents. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141:537–46.
    1. Doria AS, Moineddin R, Kellenberger CJ, et al. US or CT for diagnosis of appendicitis in children and adults? A meta-analysis. Radiology. 2006;241:83–94.
    1. van Randen A, Bipat S, Zwinderman AH, et al. Acute appendicitis: meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of CT and graded compression US related to prevalence of disease. Radiology. 2008;249:97–106.
    1. Tzanakis NE, Efstathiou SP, Danulidis K, et al. A new approach to accurate diagnosis of acute appendicitis. World J Surg. 2005;29:1151–56.
    1. American College of Emergency Physicians. Emergency ultrasound guidelines. Ann Emerg Med. 2009;53:550–70.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj