Detection of pinpoint tenderness on the appendix under ultrasonography is useful to confirm acute appendicitis

Current Trends in Training in the Surgical Management of Acute Appendicitis at a Veteran Affairs Hospital

INTRODUCTION

An open appendectomy used to be one of the most common cases performed by interns and physical exam dictated operative intervention. We hypothesized that the management of acute appendicitis has drastically changed from these previous practices.

METHODS

A retrospective, single institution study was performed at the VA North Texas Health Care System between July 2005 to June 2017 for all patients who underwent an appendectomy. Using postgraduate year (PGY)-level (PGY 1-3 and PGY 4-5) as a dependent variable, univariate analyses, and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed. All statistical tests were 2-sided, and the statistical significance level was set at a p ≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

Only patients with acute appendicitis were included (n = 257; male = 90.7%; age = 45.4 ± 15.6 year old; body mass index = 30.3 ± 6.3 Kg/m²). Of these, only 8 were performed by interns, 25 by PGY-2, 147 by PGY-3, 22 by PGY-4, and 55 by PGY-5. On presentation, 92.2% of patients had a computed tomography scan and 90.7% underwent a laparoscopic appendectomy. Conversion rate was 4.7%. There were 20 complications (7.8%) and length of hospital stay was 2.2±3.7 days. Comparing patients operated by senior (PGY-4 and 5) to junior (PGY-1 to -3) residents: patients were of similar age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), and had similar WBC and blood pressure on initial presentation (all p's > 0.05); but were more likely to have diabetes mellitus, hypertension or pulmonary disease. Complication rate was the same (7.8%) for both senior and junior residents.

CONCLUSIONS

At the VA North Texas Health Care System, most patients presenting with suspected appendicitis undergo a computed tomography scan. Most cases are performed laparoscopically mainly by PGY ≥ 3 residents. The rate of post-operative complications was similar between junior and senior residents.

Abdominal Physical Signs and Medical Eponyms: Physical Examination of Palpation Part 1, 1876-1907

BACKGROUND

Abdominal palpation is a difficult skill to master in the physical examination. It is through the tactile sensation of touch that abdominal tenderness is detected and expressed through pain. Its findings can be used to detect peritonitis and other acute and subtle abnormalities of the abdomen. Some techniques, recognized as signs or medical eponyms, assist clinicians in detecting disease and differentiating other conditions based on location and response to palpation. Described in this paper are medical eponyms associated with abdominal palpation from the period 1876 to 1907.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Medline, on-line Internet word searches, textbooks and references from other source text were used as the data source. PubMed was searched using the Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) of the name of the eponyms and text words associated with the sign.

CONCLUSION

We present brief historical background information about the physician who reported the sign, original description of the sign, and its clinical application and implication in today's medical practice.

Point-of-Care Ultrasound Integrated Into a Staged Diagnostic Algorithm for Pediatric Appendicitis

OBJECTIVES

We hypothesized that point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is as accurate as radiology-performed ultrasound in evaluating children with clinical concern for appendicitis. As part of a staged approach, we further hypothesized that POCUS could ultimately decrease computed tomography (CT) utilization.

METHODS

This was a prospective, convenience sampling of patients aged 2 to 18 years presenting with abdominal pain to a pediatric emergency department. Those patients with prior abdominal imaging, pregnant, or unable to tolerate the examination were excluded. An algorithm was followed: POCUS was first performed, followed by a radiology-performed ultrasound, and then a CT as necessary. The main outcome measure was the accuracy of the POCUS in diagnosing of appendicitis. This was compared with radiology-performed ultrasound. We also examined whether certain patient or clinical characteristics influenced the performance of POCUS. Lastly, we determined the amount by which CT scans were decreased through this staged algorithm.

RESULTS

Forty patients were enrolled and underwent a POCUS examination. A total of 16 (40%) had pathology-confirmed appendicitis. Point-of-care ultrasound had a sensitivity of 93.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 69.7%-98.9%) and specificity of 87.5% (95% CI, 67.6%-97.2%). Radiology-performed ultrasound had a sensitivity of 81.25% (95% CI, 54.3%-95.7%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI, 85.6%-100%). The radiology-performed and POCUS examinations had very good agreement (κ = 0.83, P < 0.0005). Patient characteristics including body mass index did not have an affect on the POCUS. However, POCUS identified all patients with an Alvarado score higher than 6. Overall, the reduction in CT examinations was 55%.

CONCLUSIONS

In pediatric patients presenting with clinical concern for acute appendicitis, a staged algorithm that incorporates POCUS is accurate and has the potential to decrease CT scan utilization.

The Use of Ultrasonography to Assess Patients with Right Lower Quadrant Pain in the Emergency Department

Acute appendicitis is always a clinical challenge to emergency physicians. Clinical examination or blood tests are notoriously unreliable in making the diagnosis, especially in the early phase of the disease. Computed tomogram can facilitate the diagnosis, however it is usually not easily accessible to emergency physicians. Bedside ultrasonography is now frequently used by emergency physicians in various situations for the assessment of patients. This study aimed at exploring the potential use of bedside ultrasonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in patients presenting with right lower quadrant abdominal pain.

Point-of-Care Ultrasonography for Appendicitis Uncovers Two Alternate Diagnoses

We present two cases of pediatric patients initially presenting with a clinical suspicion of acute appendicitis. In these cases, point-of-care ultrasonography was performed early in the patient's emergency department course, leading to alternate diagnoses. This article highlights a role for point-of-care ultrasound in the diagnoses of two alternate conditions that clinically mimic appendicitis: Meckel diverticulitis and acute ileocecitis. We offer a brief overview of terminology, relevant literature, and ultrasound scanning technique for the right-lower-quadrant point-of-care ultrasound evaluation.

Bedside ultrasonography as an adjunct to routine evaluation of acute appendicitis in the emergency department

Introduction

Appendicitis is a common condition presenting to the emergency department (ED). Increasingly emergency physicians (EP) are using bedside ultrasound (BUS) as an adjunct diagnostic tool. Our objective is to investigate the test characteristics of BUS for the diagnosis of appendicitis and identify components of routine ED workup and BUS associated with the presence of appendicitis.

Methods

Patients four years of age and older presenting to the ED with suspected appendicitis were eligible for enrollment. After informed consent was obtained, BUS was performed on the subjects by trained EPs who had undergone a minimum of one-hour didactic training on the use of BUS to diagnose appendicitis. They then recorded elements of clinical history, physical examination, white blood cell count (WBC) with polymophonuclear percentage (PMN), and BUS findings on a data form. We ascertained subject outcomes by a combination of medical record review and telephone follow-up.

Results

A total of 125 subjects consented for the study, and 116 had adequate image data for final analysis. Prevalence of appendicitis was 40%. Mean age of the subjects was 20.2 years, and 51% were male. BUS was 100% sensitive (95% CI 87–100%) and 32% specific (95% CI 14–57%) for detection of appendicitis, with a positive predictive value of 72% (95% CI 56–84%), and a negative predictive value of 100% (95% CI 52–100%). Assuming all non-diagnostic studies were negative would yield a sensitivity of 72% and specificity of 81%. Subjects with appendicitis had a significantly higher occurrence of anorexia, nausea, vomiting, and a higher WBC and PMN count when compared to those without appendicitis. Their BUS studies were significantly more likely to result in visualization of the appendix, appendix diameter >6mm, appendix wall thickness >2mm, periappendiceal fluid, visualization of the appendix tip, and sonographic Mcburney’s sign (p<0.05). In subjects with diagnostic BUS studies, WBC, PMN, visualization of appendix, appendix diameter >6mm, appendix wall thickness >2mm, periappendiceal fluid were found to be predictors of appendicitis on logistic regression.

Conclusion

BUS is moderately useful for appendicitis diagnosis. We also identified several components in routine ED workup and BUS that are associated with appendicitis generating hypothesis for future studies.

Sonography of acute appendicitis and its mimics in children

The diagnosis of acute right lower quadrant pain in a pediatric population is challenging. Acute appendicitis is the most common cause of an acute surgical abdomen. The common mimics of acute appendicitis are acute gastrointestinal and gynecologic diseases. This article reviews the sonographic findings of the spectrum of common acute abdominal emergencies in children with a focus on imaging clues to a specific diagnosis. This awareness can impact on diagnostic accuracy and impact patient management.

Validation of the diagnostic score for acute lower abdominal pain in women of reproductive age

Background. The differential diagnoses of acute appendicitis obstetrics, and gynecological conditions (OB-GYNc) or nonspecific abdominal pain in young adult females with lower abdominal pain are clinically challenging. The present study aimed to validate the recently developed clinical score for the diagnosis of acute lower abdominal pain in female of reproductive age. Method. Medical records of reproductive age women (15-50 years) who were admitted for acute lower abdominal pain were collected. Validation data were obtained from patients admitted during a different period from the development data. Result. There were 302 patients in the validation cohort. For appendicitis, the score had a sensitivity of 91.9%, a specificity of 79.0%, and a positive likelihood ratio of 4.39. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratio in diagnosis of OB-GYNc were 73.0%, 91.6%, and 8.73, respectively. The areas under the receiver operating curves (ROC), the positive likelihood ratios, for appendicitis and OB-GYNc in the validation data were not significantly different from the development data, implying similar performances. Conclusion. The clinical score developed for the diagnosis of acute lower abdominal pain in female of reproductive age may be applied to guide differential diagnoses in these patients.

Analgesia in patients with acute abdominal pain

BACKGROUND

For decades, the indication of analgesia in patients with Acute Abdominal Pain (AAP) has been deferred until the definitive diagnosis has been made, for fear of masking symptoms, generating a change in the physical exploration or obstructing the diagnosis of a disease requiring surgical treatment. This strategy has been questioned by some studies that have shown that the use of analgesia in the initial evaluation of patients with AAP leads to a significant reduction in pain without affecting diagnostic accuracy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the evidence available supports the use of opioid analgesics in the diagnostic process of patients with AAP.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were identified through searches in Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (1966 to 2009) and EMBASE (1980 to 2009). A randomised controlled trial (RCT) filter for a MEDLINE search was applied (with appropriate modification for an EMBASE search). Trials also were identified through "related articles". The search was not limited by language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published RCTs which included adult patients with AAP, without gender restriction, comparing any opioids analgesia regimen with the non-use of analgesic before any intervention and independent of the results.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent reviewers assessed the studies identified via the electronic search. Articles that were relevant and pertinent to the aims of the study were selected and their respective full-text versions were collected for subsequent blinded evaluation. The allocation concealment was considered in particular as an option to diminish the biases.The data collected from the studies were reviewed qualitatively and quantitatively using the Cochrane Collaboration statistical software RevMan 5.0. After performing the meta-analysis, the chi-squared test for heterogeneity was applied. In situations of significant clinical heterogeneity, statistical analyses were not applied to the pool of results. In situations of heterogeneity, the random effect model was used to perform the meta-analysis of the results. A sensitivity analysis was also applied based on the evaluation to the methodological quality of the primary studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Differences with use of opioid analgesia were verified in variables: Change in the intensity of the pain, change in the patients comfort level.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of opioid analgesics in the therapeutic diagnosis of patients with AAP does not increase the risk of diagnosis error or the risk of error in making decisions regarding treatment.

Typical signs of acute appendicitis in ultrasonography mimicked by other diseases?

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pediatric patients is difficult. There are patients with positive ultrasonography without clinical or histological confirmation of acute appendicitis. It is essential to recognise these patients to avoid unnecessary surgery.

METHODS

During 1 year, we compared the patients with 'false-positive' ultrasonography with those with 'true-positive' and those with 'true-negative' ultrasonography.

RESULTS

Eighty-two patients were admitted to our inpatient ward for suspected appendicitis. Ultrasonography was performed on 68 patients. In sixteen cases, the ultrasonography showed typical signs of acute appendicitis though the patients turned out to be negative for acute appendicitis either by an observation period (n = 13) or by negative histology (n = 3). We could not find any significant differences between the groups in terms of age, gender or laboratory inflammation markers, though the latter tended to be elevated in patients with confirmed appendicitis.

CONCLUSIONS

There are patients with clearly visible typical signs of acute appendicitis that do not need surgery and cannot be distinguished from others by age, gender or laboratory values. In conclusion, the clinical presentation still is the determining indicator for need of surgery. The underlying cause of the visible changes of the appendiceal area remains unclear, but there are several presumptions.

Prospective evaluation of emergency physician performed bedside ultrasound to detect acute appendicitis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the accuracy of emergency physicians using bedside ultrasound to detect appendicitis (BUSA).

METHODS

Patients presenting to the emergency department with a clinical suspicion of appendicitis were prospectively enrolled and received a 5-min BUSA. Patients received routine work-up for acute appendicitis as deemed appropriate by the attending physician. Radiologists and consulting surgeons were blinded to BUSA results. The criterion standard for the presence or absence of acute appendicitis was the pathology report for patients who received appendectomies, and telephone follow-up for patients discharged home without surgical intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 132 patients were enrolled. In 44 cases BUSA was positive. Of these, 37 had surgical pathology reports consistent with acute appendicitis, whereas seven did not have appendicitis. In 82 cases, BUSA was negative. Of these, 62 were determined not to have appendicitis, whereas 20 had appendicitis by pathology. Sensitivity for BUSA was 65% [95% confidence interval (CI) 52-76], specificity was 90% (95% CI 81-95), positive predictive value was 84% (95% CI 71-92), and negative predictive value was 76% (95% CI 65-84). The likelihood ratio of a positive BUSA was 6.4 (95% CI 3.1-13.2). Five patients discharged home with a diagnosis other than appendicitis were unable to be reached by telephone, and were excluded from data analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our study gives insufficient evidence to support the use of bedside ultrasound by emergency physicians to rule out appendicitis. The high specificity in our study, however, suggests that with further training, BUSA may be useful to rule-in appendicitis in some patients.

Analgesia in patients with acute abdominal pain

BACKGROUND

For decades, analgesia for patients with acute abdominal pain was withheld until a definitive diagnosis was established for fear of masking the symptoms, changing physical findings or ultimately delaying diagnosis and treatment of a surgical condition. This non-evidence-based approach has been challenged by recent studies demonstrating that the use of analgesia in the initial evaluation of patients with acute abdominal pain leads to significant pain reduction without affecting diagnostic accuracy. However, early administration of analgesia to such patients can greatly reduce their pain and does not interfere with a diagnosis, which may even be facilitated due to the severity of physical symptoms being reduced.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if the currently available evidence supports the use of opioid analgesia in patient management with acute abdominal pain; and to assess changes in a patient comfort while awaiting definitive diagnosis and final treatment decisions.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, issue 4, 2006), MEDLINE (1966 to 2006) and EMBASE (1980 to 2006). Randomized controlled trial filter for MEDLINE and EMBASE search. Trials will also be identified by "related articles". The searches were not limited by language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that include adult patients with acute abdominal pain, without gender restriction, comparing any opioid analgesia regime to no analgesia administered prior to any intervention regardless of outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors looked independently at the titles and abstracts of reports. Potentially relevant studies selected by at least one reviewer were retrieved in full text versions for potential inclusion. Allocation concealment was important to avoid bias and was graded using the Cochrane approach. The data from studies included was reviewed qualitatively and quantitatively using the Cochrane Collaborations methodology and statistical software RevMan Analysis 1.0.5. In the case of homogeneity or non- worrying heterogeneity, a random effects model was used. Sensitivity analysis was performed based on quality assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Improvement with use of opioid analgesia was verified in variables patient comfort, reduction of pain, changes in physical examination.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The review provide some evidence to support the notion that the use of opioid analgesics in patients with acute abdominal pain is helpful in terms of patient comfort and does not retard decisions to treat.