SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ortadoğu Tıp Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 4

Apendiksin ileal segmentlerden sonografik olarak ayırtedilebilmesi için gerekli kriterler: farklı bir bakış açısı

Criteria for distinguishing the appendix from ileal segments sonographically: a different perspective

Mikail İNAL
Birsen Ünal DAPHAN
M Yasemin BİLGİLİ KARADENİZ
Pages
200–206
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

Results:DI, CI, long dimension show high sensitivity and specificity in discrimination of the normal or pathological appendix from ileal segments.Conclusion: DI, CI, and long dimension are effective and objective criteria for distinguishing normal or pathological appendix from ileum sonographically

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: We aimed to establish the new and objective criteria that can be used for distinguishing the normal or pathological appendix from ileal segments sonographically.Materials and Methods:Long diameter, short diameter, mean diameter, circularity index (CI), and diameter index (DI) in mm on transverse images of normal and pathological appendices, and the others form of the ileum, were calculated.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Aim: We aimed to establish the new and objective criteria that can be used for distinguishing the normal or pathological appendix from ileal segments sonographically.Materials and Methods:Long diameter, short diameter, mean diameter, circularity index (CI), and diameter index (DI) in mm on transverse images of normal and pathological appendices, and the others form of the ileum, were calculated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results:DI, CI, long dimension show high sensitivity and specificity in discrimination of the normal or pathological appendix from ileal segments.Conclusion: DI, CI, and long dimension are effective and objective criteria for distinguishing normal or pathological appendix from ileum sonographically
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: We aimed to establish the new and objective criteria that can be used for distinguishing the normal or pathological appendix from ileal segments sonographically.Materials and Methods:Long diameter, short diameter, mean diameter, circularity index (CI), and diameter index (DI) in mm on transverse images of normal and pathological appendices, and the others form of the ileum, were calculated. Results:DI, CI, long dimension show high sensitivity and specificity in discrimination of the normal or pathological appendix from ileal segments.Conclusion: DI, CI, and long dimension are effective and objective criteria for distinguishing normal or pathological appendix from ileum sonographically

Özet

Amaç: Biz bu çalışmada normal veya patolojik apendiksin ileal segmentlerden sonografik olarak ayırtedilebilmesi için gerekli yeni ve objektif kriterler tespit etmeyi amaçladık.Materyal ve Metodlar: Normal ve patolojik apendikslerin, ileumun ikinci ve üçüncü formlarının transvers ultrasonografik kesitleri üzerinde milimetrik olarak uzun çap, kısa çap, ortalama çap, dairesellik indeksi, ve çap indeksi hesaplandı.Bulgular: Dairesellik indeksi, sirkülarite indeksi ve uzun çap, normal veya patolojik apendiksin ileal segmentlerden ayırtedilmesinde yüksek oranda sensitivite ve spesifisite gösterdi.Sonuç: Dairesellik indeksi, sirkülarite indeksi ve uzun çap normal veya patolojik apendiksin ileumdan ultrasonografik olarak ayırtedilmesinde objektif ve etkin kriterlerdir

🔖

Cite This Article

İNAL, M., DAPHAN, B. Ü., KARADENİZ, M. Y. B. (2022). Apendiksin ileal segmentlerden sonografik olarak ayırtedilebilmesi için gerekli kriterler: farklı bir bakış açısı. Ortadoğu Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 4, 200–206. https://ajindex.com/articles/585814

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Bendeck SE, Nino-Murcia M, Berry GJ, Jeffrey RB Jr. Imaging for suspected appendicitis: negative appendectomy and perforation rates. Radiology. 2002;225:131-6.
  2. Andersson RE, Hugander A, Thulin AGJ. Diagnostic accuracy and perforation rate in appendicitis: association with age and sex of the patient and with appendectomy rate. Eur J Surg. 1992;158:37-41.
  3. Velanovich V, Harkabus MA, Tapia FV, Gusz JR, Vallance SR. When it's not appendicitis. Am Surg. 1998;64:7-11.
  4. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Rattner DW, Venus LG, Novelline RA. Introduction of appendiceal CT: impact on negative appendectomy and appendiceal perforation rates. Ann Surg. 1999;229:344-9.
  5. Kan JH, Fines BP, Funaki B. Conventional and hydrocolonic US of the appendix with CT correlation performed by on-call radiology residents. Acad Radiol. 2001;8:1208-14.
  6. Lane MJ, Liu DM, Huynh MD, Jeffrey RB Jr, Mindelzun RE, et al. Suspected acute appendicitis: nonenhanced helical CT in 300 consecutive patients. Radiology. 1999;213:341-6.
  7. Yetkin G, Basak M, Isgor A, Kebudi A, Akgun I. Can negative appendectomy rate be decreased by using spiral computed tomography without contrast material? Acta Chir Belg. 2002;102:334-7.
  8. Raman SS, Lu DS, Kadell BM, Vodopich DJ, Sayre J, et al. Accuracy of nonfocused helical CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a 5-year review. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:1319-25.
  9. Balthazar EJ, Birnbaum BA, Yee J, Megibow AJ, Roshkow J, et al. Acute appendicitis: CT and US correlation in 100 patients. Radiology. 1994;190:31-5.
  10. Horton MD, Counter SF, Florence MG, Hart MJ. A prospective trial of computed tomography and ultrasonography for diagnosing appendicitis in the atypical patient. Am J Surg. 2000;179:379-81.
  11. Fujii Y, Hata J, Futagami K, Hamada T, Mitsuoka H, et al. Ultrasonography improves diagnostic accuracy of acute appendicitis and provides cost savings to hospitals in Japan. J Ultrasound Med. 2000;19:409-14.
  12. Chen SC, Chen KM, Wang SM, Chang KJ. Abdominal sonography screening of clinically diagnosed or suspected appendicitis before surgery. World J Surg. 1998;22:449-52.
  13. Bendeck SE, Nino-Murcia M, Berry GJ, Jeffrey RB Jr. Imaging for suspected appendicitis: negative appendectomy and perforation rates. Radiology. 2002;225:131-6.
  14. Andersson RE, Hugander A, Thulin AGJ. Diagnostic accuracy and perforation rate in appendicitis: association with age and sex of the patient and with appendectomy rate. Eur J Surg. 1992;158:37-41.
  15. Velanovich V, Harkabus MA, Tapia FV, Gusz JR, Vallance SR. When it's not app