Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of modified RIPASA and MASS in patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis in Suez Canal University Hospital Emergency Department: a cross-sectional study

Moussa, Bassant Sayed; Ali, Mohamed Amin; Mohamed, Dina AbdulRahman Ramadan; Shahhat, Amal Mohamed El

doi:10.1186/s12873-022-00677-7

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…87% had Rovsing Sign. This variable presentation incidence matched many studies [11][12][13] and this variability-was the main determinant of the cut off value for any scoring system and the main indicator for development of an accurate scoring system.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Accuracy and Sensitivity of RIPASA Score in Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis

Abourizk,

Abdel-Hafez,

Abdelrahman

et al. 2024

Benha Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The most frequent ailment requiring immediate surgical intervention is acute appendicitis. Up to 20% of patients had appendicular perforation, which raises the death and morbidity rates from 3% to 47%. Consequently, even in situations when there is even a low degree of suspicion, the appendix is routinely removed, which results in needless surgery for up to 40% of patients. Objective: To evaluate the sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha appendicitis(RIPASA)scoring systems of acute appendicitis in correlation with intra-operative findings. Patients and Methods: This prospective study included 193 patients with acute appendicitis. All items of RIPASA score were reported with a cut off value of 7.5 and correlated to the postoperative histopathology. Results: Mean RIPASA Score was 10.2 ± 2.3. 9.85% were negative histologically for acute appendicitis. True positive was 170 cases. True Negative cases were 13 patients. The sensitivity of RIPASA score was 96.5%, while the specificity was 76.4%. Diagnostic Accuracy was 94.8%. Conclusion:The RIPASA score is an accurate, practicable, and reliable diagnostic tool for acute appendicitis (AA) that also has a high sensitivity, positive predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy. Using a RIPASA score as a reliable diagnostic tool for acute appendicitis (AA), in Egyptians is possible when using a cutoff value of 7.5.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Accuracy and Sensitivity of RIPASA Score in Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis

Abourizk,

Abdel-Hafez,

Abdelrahman

et al. 2024

Benha Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The commonest causes include lymphoid hyperplasia, foreign body, parasitic infestations, fecaliths and malignancy. The site of obstruction can occur at any segment of the appendix from the tip to colic junction (4)(5)(6) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Accuracy of Modified Alvarado Score and Pelvi-Abdominal Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis

Mohammad,

Abd El-Gawad,

El-Askary

2024

SJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Acute abdominal pain represents about 9% of emergency visits. The likelihood of the diagnosis of surgical etiology increased with the presence of fever, vomiting, diarrhea, absent sounds of bowel, voluntary guarding, abdominal rigidity and rebound tenderness. Patient age could help in the differential diagnosis. Aim and objectives: To evaluate diagnostic accuracy of modified Alvarado Score and pelvi-abdominal ultrasound in diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Patients and methods: This prospective observational study, included 50 patients. They were selected from attendee of general surgery clinics, Al-Azhar University Hospitals, Minya-El-Qmah Hospital and Kafr Saqr Hospital, The study completed between September 2023 and March 2024. Result: There was highly statistically significant positive correlation between pathology with Modified Alvarado score (MAS), while there was statistically significant negative correlation between pathology with sensitivity of ultrasound. MAS had higher sensitivity (87.5%) and specificity (64.7%) than ultrasound for diagnosis of appendicitis. Conclusion: Modified Alvarado score (87.5% and 64.7%) had higher sensitivity and specificity than ultrasound (81.5% and 62%) for diagnosis of appendicitis. MAS is a good diagnostic tool and both of MAS and Ultrasound whenever available should be used to predict acute appendicitis to increase the number of positive cases and reduce negative appendectomy and hence reduce the morbidity and mortality.

show abstract

“…It depends primarily on an accurate and definitive history as well as a skillful clinical examination to prevent being revealed to negative appendectomies. 4 In accordance with recent guidelines, the clinical diagnosis, imaging examinations, and certain biomarkers, such as white blood cell count (WBC) and Creactive protein (CRP) levels, are all required to assess the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. 5,6 There have been fewer cases of negative appendectomies as a result of recent developments in the imaging diagnosis and the early application of computed tomography (CT).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9,10 However, because of its high cost and restricted availability, its use has been severely limited, especially in low-income source developing nations. 4 There have been many different scoring methods established to facilitate in the identification of acute appendicitis and to decrease the chances of negative appendectomies. 4 One of the scoring systems that is utilized the most frequently is the Alvarado system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative Study Between Karaman Score and Modified Alvarado Score for Predictability in Avoiding Negative Appendectomy in the Suspected Cases of Acute Appendicitis

Ghumro¹,

Parveen²,

Ahmed³

et al. 2022

PJMHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the diagnostic accuracy between the Karaman score and the Modified Alvarado score for predictability in avoiding a negative appendectomy in suspected cases of acute appendicitis. Material and methods: This comparative study was done at the general surgery department of JPMC Karachi, from February 2022 to August 2022. All the patients diagnosed as the cases of acute appendicitis undergoing surgical treatment, aged more than 14 years and of either gender, were included. Both the Karaman and the Alvarado scoring systems were implemented in order to assign points to each of the study subjects. The Alvarado score is comprised of eight different parameters, while the Karama score only makes use of six different parameters. After evaluating the patient on both scores, the decision to perform surgery was primarily based on the surgeon's clinical judgement after considering all clinical, laboratory, and radiological findings. Postoperative histopathology reports were collected, and the scores of both Alvarado and Karaman score were compared. Patients were operated and monitored throughout the stay in hospital up to discharge. Afterwards, for each score, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were determined. All the data was collected via a study proforma, and SPSS version 26 was used for the data analysis. Results: In this study, 180 cases of appendicitis undergoing surgical treatment were studied, their mean age was 27.03 ± 10.12 years, and their mean BMI was 19.88 ± 3.43 kg/m2. Males accounted for 80.0% of all study participants. As per histological findings, acute appendicitis was found in 78.9% of the cases, 14.4% of the patients had gangrenous appendicitis, while 6.5% of the cases had a normal appendix. Histopathological evaluation was statistically significant according to the appendicitis identification by Karaman scoring system and Alvarado scoring system (p-0.001). Although both scoring systems showed almost similar diagnostic accuracy, the Karaman scoring system showed sensitivity (98%), specificity (75%), PPV (98%), NPV (75%), and accuracy (96%), while the Alvarado scoring system showed sensitivity (97%), specificity (58%), PPV (97%), NPV (63%), and accuracy (95%). Conclusion: In the study conclusion, the Karaman score and Alvarado scoring systems both were observed to be the good predictive to distinguishing acute appendicitis in avoiding the negative appendectomy. Both showed almost similar and high sensitivity and accuracy by taking histopathology is gold standard. Keywords: Appendicitis, Karaman score, Alvarado score, Accuracy

show abstract

Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of modified RIPASA and MASS in patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis in Suez Canal University Hospital Emergency Department: a cross-sectional study

Cited by 4 publications

References 14 publications

Accuracy and Sensitivity of RIPASA Score in Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis

Accuracy and Sensitivity of RIPASA Score in Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis

Diagnostic Accuracy of Modified Alvarado Score and Pelvi-Abdominal Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis

Comparative Study Between Karaman Score and Modified Alvarado Score for Predictability in Avoiding Negative Appendectomy in the Suspected Cases of Acute Appendicitis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About