Diagnostic limitations of 10 mm thickness single-slice computed tomography for patients with suspected appendicitis.

Radiation medicine Pub Date : 2008-02-01 Epub Date: 2008-02-27 DOI:10.1007/s11604-007-0196-5
Motoki Kaidu, Manabu Oyamatu, Kenji Sato, Akira Saitou, Satoshi Yamamoto, Norihiko Yoshimura, Keisuke Sasai
{"title":"Diagnostic limitations of 10 mm thickness single-slice computed tomography for patients with suspected appendicitis.","authors":"Motoki Kaidu,&nbsp;Manabu Oyamatu,&nbsp;Kenji Sato,&nbsp;Akira Saitou,&nbsp;Satoshi Yamamoto,&nbsp;Norihiko Yoshimura,&nbsp;Keisuke Sasai","doi":"10.1007/s11604-007-0196-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the accuracy of 10 mm thickness single helical computed tomography (CT) examination for confirming the diagnosis of appendicitis or providing a diagnosis other than appendicitis, including underlying periappendical neoplasms.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>From April 1, 2001 to March 30, 2005, a total of 272 patients with suspected appendicitis underwent CT examinations. Of the 272 patients, 106 (39%) underwent surgery. Seven CT examinations for seven patients were excluded because of inconsistency of the CT protocol. We therefore reviewed 99 CT images (99 patients) with correlation to surgical-pathological findings to clarify the diagnostic accuracy of CT examinations. We compared the postoperative diagnosis with the preoperative CT report. The final diagnoses were confirmed by macroscopic findings at surgery and pathological evaluations if necessary.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 99 patients, 87 had acute appendicitis at surgery. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CT were 98.9%, 75.0%, and 96.0%, respectively. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 96.6% and 90.0%, respectively. Among nine patients in the true-negative category, five had colon cancers; and among three patients in the false-positive category, two had cancer of the cecal-appendiceal region as the underlying disease.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CT examination is useful for patients with suspected appendicitis, but radiologists should be aware of the limitation of thick-sliced single helical CT. They should also be aware of the possibility of other diseases, including coincident abdominal neoplasms and underlying cecal-appendiceal cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":49640,"journal":{"name":"Radiation medicine","volume":"26 2","pages":"63-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11604-007-0196-5","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiation medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-007-0196-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2008/2/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the accuracy of 10 mm thickness single helical computed tomography (CT) examination for confirming the diagnosis of appendicitis or providing a diagnosis other than appendicitis, including underlying periappendical neoplasms.

Materials and methods: From April 1, 2001 to March 30, 2005, a total of 272 patients with suspected appendicitis underwent CT examinations. Of the 272 patients, 106 (39%) underwent surgery. Seven CT examinations for seven patients were excluded because of inconsistency of the CT protocol. We therefore reviewed 99 CT images (99 patients) with correlation to surgical-pathological findings to clarify the diagnostic accuracy of CT examinations. We compared the postoperative diagnosis with the preoperative CT report. The final diagnoses were confirmed by macroscopic findings at surgery and pathological evaluations if necessary.

Results: Of the 99 patients, 87 had acute appendicitis at surgery. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CT were 98.9%, 75.0%, and 96.0%, respectively. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 96.6% and 90.0%, respectively. Among nine patients in the true-negative category, five had colon cancers; and among three patients in the false-positive category, two had cancer of the cecal-appendiceal region as the underlying disease.

Conclusion: CT examination is useful for patients with suspected appendicitis, but radiologists should be aware of the limitation of thick-sliced single helical CT. They should also be aware of the possibility of other diseases, including coincident abdominal neoplasms and underlying cecal-appendiceal cancer.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
10mm单层计算机断层扫描对疑似阑尾炎的诊断局限性。
目的:本回顾性分析的目的是评估10mm厚度单螺旋计算机断层扫描(CT)检查对阑尾炎诊断的准确性或提供阑尾炎以外的诊断,包括潜在的阑尾周围肿瘤。材料与方法:2001年4月1日至2005年3月30日,对272例疑似阑尾炎患者行CT检查。272例患者中,106例(39%)接受了手术。7例患者的7次CT检查因CT方案不一致而被排除。因此,我们回顾了99张CT图像(99例患者)与手术病理结果的相关性,以阐明CT检查的诊断准确性。我们将术后诊断与术前CT报告进行比较。最终诊断是通过手术时的宏观发现和必要时的病理评估来确定的。结果:99例患者中,87例术后发生急性阑尾炎。CT的敏感性为98.9%,特异性为75.0%,准确性为96.0%。阳性预测值为96.6%,阴性预测值为90.0%。在9名真阴性患者中,5名患有结肠癌;在假阳性的三名患者中,有两名患者的潜在疾病是盲肠阑尾区癌症。结论:CT检查对怀疑阑尾炎的患者是有用的,但放射科医师应注意单螺旋厚片CT的局限性。他们还应该意识到其他疾病的可能性,包括并发腹部肿瘤和潜在的盲肠阑尾癌。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mycotic aneurysm. Communication between cochlear perilymph and cerebrospinal fluid through the cochlear modiolus visualized after intratympanic administration of Gd-DTPA Percutaneous osteoplasty for hypervascular bone metastasis Intraorbital lobular capillary hemangioma (pyogenic granuloma) Multidetector computed tomography diagnosis of primary and secondary epiploic appendagitis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1