Journals / Haseki Tıp Bülteni / 2011 / Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 2

Comparison of different parameters in the diagnosis of acute abdomen

Akut batın teşhisinde çeşitli parametrelerin kontrol grubu ile kıyaslanması

Pages
77–83
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: We think that our parameters can be used as a guide by clinicians working in emergency departments to decide which patient should be operated on since only 12% of the study group had necessitated surgical intervention. (The Medical Bulletin of Haseki 2011;49: 77-83)

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: Acute abdominal syndrome (AAS) defines the failure to establish the primary diagnosis rather than being a definitive diagnosis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: We analyzed and recorded the data of 50 randomly chosen patients with a primary diagnosis of AAS who had been hospitalized in the emergency surgical department for follow-up.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: We think that our parameters can be used as a guide by clinicians working in emergency departments to decide which patient should be operated on since only 12% of the study group had necessitated surgical intervention. (The Medical Bulletin of Haseki 2011;49: 77-83)
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: Acute abdominal syndrome (AAS) defines the failure to establish the primary diagnosis rather than being a definitive diagnosis. The fact that many patients are discharged from the hospital without surgical intervention as well as the decision regarding which patients should undergo surgery and when, all may create a dilemma for the clinician. Methods: We analyzed and recorded the data of 50 randomly chosen patients with a primary diagnosis of AAS who had been hospitalized in the emergency surgical department for follow-up. The study group was compared with a control group (50 patients) who had been directly operated on for AAS without a preceding observation. The parameters used in the study were age, gender, guarding, rebound tenderness, ultrasonography, leucocytosis, and left shift of the neutrophils. Results: The mean age of the patients in the study group was statistically significantly higher than that in the control group and surgery was not necessary in 88%.Statistically significant difference was found between the two groups for guarding, rebound tenderness, ultrasonography, and gender. Logistic regression analysis revealed that rebound tenderness and ultrasonography results were more valuable than the other parameters. Rebound tenderness and ultrasonography influenced the decision for surgical intervention by 7.9- and 17.3- fold increases, respectively. Conclusion: We think that our parameters can be used as a guide by clinicians working in emergency departments to decide which patient should be operated on since only 12% of the study group had necessitated surgical intervention. (The Medical Bulletin of Haseki 2011;49: 77-83)

Özet

Amaç: Akut batın sendromu (ABS), teşhis edilmiş bir durumu vurgulamaktan ziyade primer teşhisteki yetersizliği vurgular. Çoğu hastanın gözlemle taburcu edilmesi, hangi hastalarda ameliyatla sonlanan sürece girildiğini veya ameliyat kararının ne zaman alınması gerektiği, klinisyen için bir açmaz oluşturabilmektedir. Yöntemler: Haseki Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Acil Cerrahi Kli-niği'nde ABS ön tanısı ile ardışık randomize takip amaçlı hospitalize edilen 50 hastanın incelenmesi sonucu elde edilen veriler kaydedildi. Çalışma grubunu oluşturan 50 hasta ile akut apandisit nedeni ile direkt ameliyat edilen 50 hasta (kontrol grubu) retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Çalışmada kullanılan parametreler yaş, cinsiyet, defans, rebound hassasiyet, ultrasonografi, lökosit sayısı ve nötrofil oranında sola kayma idi. Bulgular: Akut batın grubunda hastaların yaş ortalaması, kontrol grubuna göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı derecede yüksek bulunmuştur ve akut batın grubunda hastaların %88'i ameliyat edilmeden şifa ile taburcu edilmiştir. Defans mevcudiyeti, rebound hassasiyet, ultrasonografi ve cinsiyet istatistiksel anlamlı fark göstermiştir. Lojistik regresyon analizinde rebound hassasiyet ve ultrasonografi istatistiksel olarak diğer parametrelere göre daha anlamlı bulunmuştur ve rebound hassasiyet mevcudiyeti operasyon kararını 7.9 kat arttırırken, ultrason pozitifliği 17.3 kat etkilemiştir. Olası bir skorlama sistemi kurgusunda en yüksek katsayıları bu iki parametre hak etmektedir. Sonuç: Çalışma grubunun sadece %12'sinin ameliyat gerektirmesi de düşünüldüğünde acil hekimlerinin ABS ile başvuran hastaları değerlendirirken çalıştığımız parametreleri rehber olarak kullanabileceklerini düşünmekteyiz.

🔖

Cite This Article

KOCAKUŞAK, A., ÖZDEMİR, H. L., ANIL, M. Y., GÜLER, N., GÖRMÜŞ, C., AYDIN, S., ÖZER, E., BULUT, S. P. (2011). Comparison of different parameters in the diagnosis of acute abdomen. Haseki Tıp Bülteni, Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 2, 77–83. https://ajindex.com/articles/268036

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Oertli D. Acute Abdomen-Injured Abdomen. Postgraduate Course. In: Proceedings of the Montreux, Switzerland, 2007. pp:1-15. 2. -de Dombal FT. The OMGE acute abdominal pain survey progress report. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl 1988;144:35-42. 3. Irvin TT. Abdominal pain: a surgical audit of 1190 emergency admissions. Br J Surg 1989;76:1121-5. 4. Wilson DH, Wilson PD, Walmslay RG. Prognosis of acute abdominal pain in accident and emergency department. Br J Surg 1977;64:249-52. 5. Leung AKC, Sigalet DL. Acute Abdominal Pain in Children. American Family Physician 2003;67:2321-6. 6. Doshi M, Heaton KW. Irritable bowel syndrome in patients discharged from surgical wards with nonspesific abdominal pain. Br J Surg 1994;81:1216-8. 7. Fales WD, Overton DT. Abdominal pain. In: Tintinalli JE, Ruiz E. Emergency medicine: a comprehensive study guide. 4th ed.New York: McGraw-Hill Companies Inc; 1996. p.217-21. 8. de Dombal FT. Acute abdominal pain--an O.M.G.E. survey. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl 1979;14:29-43. 9. Lukens TW, Emerman C, Effron D. The natural history and clinical findings in undifferentiated abdominal pain. Ann Emerg Med 1993;22:690-6. 10. Kraemer M, Franke C, Ohmann C, Yang Q; Acute Abdominal Pain Study Group. Acute abdominal pain in late adulthood: incidence, presentation, and outcome. Results of a prospective multicenter acute abdominal pain tudy and a review of the literature. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2000;385:470-81. 11. Özgüç H, Çakın N, Duman U. Akut nonspesifik karın ağrıları olguların bir yıllık prognozları, semptom ve bulgularının tanısal doğruluğu. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 2008;14:118-24. 12. Raheja SK, McDonald PJ. Nonspesific abdominal pain-an expensive mystery. J R Soc Med 1990;83:10-1. 13. Sheridan WG, White AT. Nonspesific abdominal pain: the resource implications. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1992;74:181-5. 14. Pines J, Uscher Pines L, Hall A, Hunter J, Srinivasan R, Ghaemmaghami C. The interrater variation of ED abdominal examination findings in patients with acute abdominal pain. Am J Emerg Med 2005;23:483-7. 15. Yang HR, Wang YC, Chung PK, Chen WK, Jeng LB, Chen RJ. Laboratory tests in patients with acute appendicitis. ANZ J Surg 2006;76:71-4.