Computed tomography evaluation of variations in positions and measurements of appendix in patients with non-appendicular symptoms: time to revise the diagnostic criteria for appendicitis.
{"title":"Computed tomography evaluation of variations in positions and measurements of appendix in patients with non-appendicular symptoms: time to revise the diagnostic criteria for appendicitis.","authors":"Neha Singh, Prasant Agrawal, Deepak Kumar Singh, Gaurav Raj Agrawal","doi":"10.5114/pjr.2023.131074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To estimate the frequency distribution of different anatomical positions, and to measure the diameter, wall thickness, and length of appendix in patients with non-appendicular symptoms.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This retrospective observational study was conducted among 1,575 patients, who had undergone computed tomography (CT) scan of abdomen for various non-appendicular signs and symptoms. Frequency of distribution of different anatomic locations and measurements of various morphologic parameters were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most common location of appendix was retrocecal, followed by sub-cecal, post-ileal, and pelvic locations. The mean length of appendix was 66.7 mm (range, 6.3-123 mm), and the diameter was 6.3 mm (range, 2.8-11.3 mm). Diameter of > 6 mm was noted in 48.12% patients. The mean wall thickness was 2.37 mm, ranging 1.2-4.2 mm. The most common intra-luminal content was air-mixed with hypodense or hyperdense material observed in 70.5% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although an appendix with diameter less than 6 mm may be considered normal, a diameter above 6 mm has an overlap between a normal and inflamed appendix. Therefore, it should be considered in association with clinical and secondary findings to avoid overdiagnosis and unnecessary appendicectomies. We strongly recommend that diameter-based CT criteria to diagnose appendicitis should be revised and standardized.</p>","PeriodicalId":94174,"journal":{"name":"Polish journal of radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/91/fe/PJR-88-51361.PMC10551737.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish journal of radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr.2023.131074","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To estimate the frequency distribution of different anatomical positions, and to measure the diameter, wall thickness, and length of appendix in patients with non-appendicular symptoms.
Material and methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted among 1,575 patients, who had undergone computed tomography (CT) scan of abdomen for various non-appendicular signs and symptoms. Frequency of distribution of different anatomic locations and measurements of various morphologic parameters were recorded.
Results: The most common location of appendix was retrocecal, followed by sub-cecal, post-ileal, and pelvic locations. The mean length of appendix was 66.7 mm (range, 6.3-123 mm), and the diameter was 6.3 mm (range, 2.8-11.3 mm). Diameter of > 6 mm was noted in 48.12% patients. The mean wall thickness was 2.37 mm, ranging 1.2-4.2 mm. The most common intra-luminal content was air-mixed with hypodense or hyperdense material observed in 70.5% of cases.
Conclusions: Although an appendix with diameter less than 6 mm may be considered normal, a diameter above 6 mm has an overlap between a normal and inflamed appendix. Therefore, it should be considered in association with clinical and secondary findings to avoid overdiagnosis and unnecessary appendicectomies. We strongly recommend that diameter-based CT criteria to diagnose appendicitis should be revised and standardized.