Journals / Acta Medica Alanya / 2020 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1

Can appendix bending angle be an additional finding to detect acute appendicitis on MDCT?

Akut appendisitin ÇKBT tanısında appendiks bükülme açısı ek bir tanısal bulgu olabilir mi?

Pages
76–81
Publication Date
2022-09-04
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: ABA can be used as an additional finding which is decreased in acute appendicitis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: Computed tomography (CT) is frequently used as an imaging modality in the evaluation of acute appendicitis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: This retrospective study was conducted after the local ethics committee’s approval. 52 consecutive patients who underwent appendectomies were assigned to the study group.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: ABA can be used as an additional finding which is decreased in acute appendicitis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: Computed tomography (CT) is frequently used as an imaging modality in the evaluation of acute appendicitis. The most frequently used measurement to detect acute appendicitis is maximal outer diameter of appendix on CT and several studies have reported other CT findings of acute appendicitis, such as thickness of the appendiceal wall, appendiceal wall enhancement, peri-appendiceal free fluid, peri-appendiceal inflammation, peri-appendiceal lymph node, appendicolith and cecal wall thickening. We investigated the value of the appendix bending angle (ABA) as an additional and novel finding in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted after the local ethics committee’s approval. 52 consecutive patients who underwent appendectomies were assigned to the study group. The patients, who underwent abdominopelvic CT for any other reason than acute abdomen, were included as control group. Results: The mean age of the appendicitis group was 41.9±16.0; male predominance was present (n=32, 61.5%). Peri-appendiceal inflammation was seen in 65.4%, peri-appendiceal lymph node was seen in 73.1% and appendicolith was present in 9.6% of the appendicitis group. The mean ABA was 103.0±15.9 degree in study group and 118.8±23,8 degree in control group respectively (p<0.001). The sensitivity of ABA was calculated as 76.9% and the specificity was 58.3% at 113.15 degree which is the best cut-off point calculated by ROC curve. There was no appendicitis over 142.3 degrees. Conclusion: ABA can be used as an additional finding which is decreased in acute appendicitis.

Özet

Amaç: Bilgisayarlı tomografi (BT), akut apandisit tanısında sık kullanılan bir görüntüleme yöntemidir. Akut apandisiti saptamak için BT'de en sık kullanılan ölçüm; apendiks en geniş dış çapının transvers düzlemde ölçümüdür. Birçok çalışma apendiks duvar kalınlığı, apendiks duvar kontrastlanması, peri-apendiküler serbest sıvısı, peri-apendiküler enflamasyon, peri-apendiküler lenf nodu, apendikolit ve çekum duvar kalınlaşması gibi akut apandisitin diğer BT bulgularını bildirilmiştir. Biz çalışmamızda akut apandisit tanısında apendiks bükülme açısının (ABA) tanıya ek ve yeni bir bulgu olarak katkısını araştırdık. Yöntemler: Bu retrospektif çalışma enstitüden etik kurul onayı alındıktan sonra yapıldı. Çalışma grubuna ardışık tarihlerde apendektomi yapılan 52 hasta alındı. Akut batın dışı nedenlerle abdominal BT çekilen hastalardan da kontrol grubu oluşturuldu. Bulgular: Akut apandisit grubunun yaş ortalaması 41.9 ± 16.0 idi. Erkek hastalar çoğunluktaydı (n = 32, %61.5). Akut apandisit grubunda peri-apendiküler inflamasyon %65.4, peri-apendiküler lenf nodu %73.1 ve apendikolit %9.6 oranlarında pozitif bulundu. Ortalama ABA, çalışma grubunda 103.0 ± 15.9 derece, kontrol grubunda ise 118.8 ± 23.8 derece idi (p <0.001). ABA'nın duyarlılığı % 76.9 olarak hesaplandı ve özgüllüğü ROC eğrisi ile hesaplanan en iyi kesme noktası olan 113.15 derecede % 58.3 idi. 142.3 derecenin üzerinde akut apandisit saptanmadı. Sonuç: ABA’nın azalmış olması akut apendisit tanısında ek bir bulgu olarak kullanılabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Hekimoğlu, B., Kaya, İ. O., Ertan, N., Akdağ, T., Subası, I. D. (2022). Can appendix bending angle be an additional finding to detect acute appendicitis on MDCT?. Acta Medica Alanya, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1, 76–81. https://ajindex.com/articles/425805

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Addiss DG, Shaffer N, Fowler BS, Tauxe RV. The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States. Am J Epidemiol. 1990
  2. 132(5):910-925 DOI: 10.1093/ oxfordjournals.aje.a115734 2. Allievi N, Harbi A, Ceresoli M, Montori G, Poiasina E, Coccolini F, Pisano M, Ansaloni L. Acute Appendicitis: Still a Surgical Disease? Results from a Propensity Score-Based Outcome Analysis of Conservative Versus Surgical Management from a Prospective Database. World J Surg. 2017
  3. 41(11):2697-705. DOI:10.1007/s00268-017-4094-4 3. Mostbeck G, Adam EJ, Nielsen MB, Claudon M, Clevert D, Nicolau C, Nyhsen C, Owens CM. How to diagnose acute appendicitis: ultrasound first. Insights Imaging. 2016
  4. 7(2):255-63. DOI:10.1007/s13244-016-0469-6 4. McDonald GP, Pendarvis DP, Wilmoth R, Daley BJ. Influence of preoperative computed tomography on patients undergoing appendectomy. Am Surg. 2001
  5. 67(11):1017-21 PMID: 11730216 5. Raman SS, Osuagwu FC, Kadell B, Cryer H, Sayre J, Lu DS. Effect of CT on false positive diagnosis of appendicitis and perforation. N Engl J Med. 2008
  6. 358(9):972-73. DOI:10.1056/NEJMc0707000 6. Kabir SA, Kabir SI, Sun R, Jafferbhoy S, Karim A. How to diagnose an acutely inflamed appendix
  7. a systematic review of the latest evidence. Int J Surg. 2017
  8. DOİ:10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.03.013 7. Tamburrini S, Brunetti A, Brown M, Sirlin CB, Casola G. CT appearance of the normal appendix in adults. Eur Radiol. 2005
  9. 15(10):2096-103. DOI:10.1007/s00330-005- 2784-z 8. Jan YT, Yang FS, Huang JK. Visualization rate and pattern of normal appendix on multidetector computed tomography by using multiplanar reformation display. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2005
  10. 29(4):446-51 DOI: 10.1097/01.rct.0000164668.03767.53 9. Kim HC, Yang DM, Jin W. Identification of the normal appendix in healthy adults by 64-slice MDCT: the value of adding coronal reformation images. Br J Radiol. 2008
  11. 81(971):859-64. DOI:10.1259/bjr/19297777 10. Celep B, Bal A, Özsoy M, Özkeçeci Z, Tunay K, Erşen O, Arıkan Y. Akut apandisit tanısında bilgisayarlı tomografinin yeri. Bozok Tıp Dergisi. 2014
  12. 4(3):33-29 11. Simonovsky. Sonographic detection of normal and abnormal appendix. Clin Radiol. 1999
  13. 54 (8):533-39 DOI: 10.1016/s0009-9260(99)90851-6 12. Ives EP, Sung S, McCue P, Durrani H, Halpern EJ. Independent predictors of acute appendicitis on CT with pathologic correlation. Acad Radiol. 2008
  14. 15(8):996-1003. DOI:10.1016/j.acra.2008.02.009 13. Lee SY, Coughlin B, Wolfe JM, Polino J, Blank FS, Smithline HA. Prosp