Erratum to: Predicting Acute Appendicitis? A Comparison of the Alvarado Score, the Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score and Clinical Assessment

Kollár, Dániel; McCartan, Damian; Bourke, Michael; Cross, K.S.; Dowdall, Joseph

doi:10.1007/s00268-014-2822-6

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 8 Thus, different scoring systems have been developed. 9 Alvarado scoring system is the oldest and most commonly used one in adults. 3 Alvarado scoring system suggested that the patients with a score below 5 did not have appendicitis, but the patients with a score of 7 or higher would require surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Appendicitis Scoring Systems in Childhood Appendicitis

Sağ¹,

Başar²,

Yurdadogan³

et al. 2022

Turk Arch Pediatrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Appendicitis scoring systems have been developed as a diagnostic tool to improve the decision-making process in patients with suspected appendicitis.The aim of the study was to compare the results of the Alvarado, The Pediatric Appendicitis Score, modified Pediatric Appendicitis Score, Lintula, and Tzanakis scoring systems in childhood appendicitis. We also aimed to see whether our rates of correct diagnosis and negative appendectomy could change, if we had made decisions using the scoring systems. Materials and Methods: The patients who underwent appendectomy because of suspected appendicitis between June 2019 and June 2020 were evaluated prospectively. The patients were divided into appendicitis and non-appendicitis groups according to histopathological findings. The obtained data were used to calculate the scores for the scoring systems and statistical analyses. Results: In the study, 141 patients were included. The negative appendectomy rate was 14.8%. The lowest negative appendectomy rate (6.38%) was obtained with the Lintula scoring system. Tzanakis scoring system had the highest accuracy rate (85.1%) compared to the other scoring systems. Conclusion: The present scoring systems may assist in establishing the diagnosis of appendicitis and reducing negative appendectomy rates. The Lintula scoring system has the lowest negative appendectomy rate due to its higher specificity compared to Alvarado, Pediatric Appendicitis Score, modified Pediatric Appendicitis Score, and Tzanakis scoring systems. Tzanakis scoring system has the highest accuracy rate in the diagnosis of appendicitis, and thus we believe that it may be used as an alternative scoring system for children.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Appendicitis Scoring Systems in Childhood Appendicitis

Sağ¹,

Başar²,

Yurdadogan³

et al. 2022

Turk Arch Pediatrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The diagnosis of appendicitis tests the clinical judgment of the surgeon 9,13,15 It is almost entirely clinical. Lab investigation and radiological reports are useful for exclusion of other diagnoses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The clinical condition of the patient must be taken into consideration before performing the surgery. If the condition of the patient permits, they are usually prepared by a short period of intensive pre-opertaive preparation by intravenous fluids to ensure adequate urine output, and appropriate antibiotics 9 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic management of perforated appendicitis-a study of 90 cases

Khan

Sultana²,

Ahsan

et al. 2020

J. Surg. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Acute appendicitis is the most common general surgical emergency in the world. It may cause potential risk for patients due to its life threaten complications like burst (perforation). The perforated appendicitis often leads to serious infectious complication like abdominal sepsis, pelvic abscess & etc. There are concerns of using laparoscopic appendectomy to perforated appendicitis. Now a days laparoscopic management of perforated appendicitis is the standard surgical option in many countries. Laparoscopic procedure has tremendous advantages over the open procedure regarding its diagnosis, exclusion of additional pathology, surgical treatment, wound infection (port infection), hospital stay & overall patient’s satisfaction. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the role and application of laparoscopy in the management of complicated appendicitis (perforation). Methods: It is a prospective study conducting during January 2011 to May 2019 in BSMMU and some private hospitals of Dhaka, Bangladesh. It includes 90 patients in whom laparoscopic appendicectomy & peritoneal lavage was performed. Three ports technique were usual. Sometimes 4th port is required. 10 mm port is telescopic port. The other one is 3/5 mm port and another one is 5/10 mm port.Energy source is unipolar diathermy. Intracorporeal knotting, endoloop and haemoclip are used for haemostosis& ligating appendicular stump. Results: Age distribution of the study is 3-90 years, mean 17 years. Male is predominant. Duration varies 10-120 minutes, mean 70 minutes. Duration varies 30-120 minutes, mean 70 minutes. Hospital stay varies from 48-96 hours, mean 64 hours. There were 8 complications- single (5, 5.55%) or multiple (3, 3.33%) port infections, paralytic ileus (2, 2.22%) and diarrhea (1, 1.11%), port TB was identified (3, 3.33%) cases among the port infection. Conversion was 1 (1.11%) for controlling haemorrhage of burst appendicitis. All complications are managed conservatively. Conclusion: Total management of perforated appendicitis by laparoscopy is excellent. So it is achievable, feasible & can be done by expert hand in any center. Now it is considered as standard procedure. Journal of Surgical Sciences (2019) Vol. 23(2): 59-66

show abstract

“…Several studies have validated scoring models for the identification of patients at high-risk for appendicitis. Four studies have validated the Alvarado score ( 20 – 23 ), five the AIRS ( 21 , 23 , 20 , 24 , 25 ), and two the AAS ( 23 , 26 ), but results are very heterogeneous. We used a bivariate logit-normal random-effect model to pool results of the included studies for present review; the reported sensitivity and specificity for the Alvarado score were 24% and 97%, for the AIRS 22% and 97%, and for the AAS 53% and 93%, respectively.…”

Section: Diagnostic Work-up For Acute Appendicitismentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosis of Uncomplicated and Complicated Appendicitis in Adults

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Diagnostic work-up of acute appendicitis remains challenging. While some guidelines advise to use a risk stratification based on clinical parameters, others use standard imaging in all patients. As non-operative management of uncomplicated appendicitis has been identified as feasible and safe, differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis is of paramount importance. We reviewed the literature to describe the optimal strategy for diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Methods: A narrative review about the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adult patients was conducted. Both diagnostic strategies and goals were analyzed. Results: For diagnosing acute appendicitis, both ruling in and ruling out the disease are important. Clinical and laboratory findings individually do not suffice, but when combined in a diagnostic score, a better risk prediction can be made for having acute appendicitis. However, for accurate diagnosis imaging seems obligatory in patients suspected for acute appendicitis. Scoring systems combining clinical and imaging features may differentiate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis and may enable ruling out complicated appendicitis. Within conservatively treated patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, predictive factors for non-responsiveness to antibiotics and recurrence of appendicitis need to be defined in order to optimize treatment outcomes. Conclusion: Standard imaging increases the diagnostic power for both ruling in and ruling out acute appendicitis. Incorporating imaging features in clinical scoring models may provide better differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Optimizing patient selection for antibiotic treatment of appendicitis may minimize recurrence rates, resulting in better treatment outcomes.

show abstract

Erratum to: Predicting Acute Appendicitis? A Comparison of the Alvarado Score, the Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score and Clinical Assessment

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Comparison of Appendicitis Scoring Systems in Childhood Appendicitis

Comparison of Appendicitis Scoring Systems in Childhood Appendicitis

Laparoscopic management of perforated appendicitis-a study of 90 cases

Diagnosis of Uncomplicated and Complicated Appendicitis in Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About