Role of Alvarado score and biological indicators of C-reactive protein, procalicitonin and neopterin in diagnosis of acute appendicitis

Assessment of the Diagnostic Value of Novel Biomarkers in Adult Patients With Acute Appendicitis: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most frequent causes of abdominal pain requiring emergency intervention in adults. Approximately one-third of cases present with atypical clinical symptoms. This study aims to compare the monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), red cell distribution width (RDW) to lymphocyte ratio (RLR), and systemic immune inflammation index (SII) with other biomarkers in distinguishing patients with and without AA. Methodology A total of 347 patients (AA 125, nonspecific abdominal pain 90, and control group 132) were enrolled in the study according to the cross-sectional study design. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the cutoff in diagnostic value measurements. Statistical significance was determined by the statistics of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Comparison of ROC curves of C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell (WBC), neutrophil count (NEU), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), MLR, and SII was evaluated with the pairwise comparison of ROC curves and 95% confidence interval. Results In detecting AA, CRP, WBC, NEU, NLR, MLR, and SII have excellent diagnostic power (area under the curve [AUC] 0.80-0.88), while RDW, lymphocyte count, monocyte (MON) count, and RLR had acceptable diagnostic power (AUC 0.70-0.77). When the power in the diagnosis of AA was compared, a significant difference was found between CRP and NEU, CRP and SII, WBC and NEU, and WBC and SII. Conclusions The diagnosis of AA remains dependent on many factors. Inflammatory biomarkers assist this process. MLR and SII may be recommended to use in diagnosing AA in adults, along with other clinical findings. RLR is adequate but not superior.

The Use of Procalcitonin in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common surgical pathologies. Its diagnosis is often carried out based on clinical signs and symptoms, with additional minimally invasive tests (i.e., blood testing) done to support the diagnosis. Procalcitonin (PCT) is a relatively novel biomarker that is starting to be used by clinicians for patients admitted into hospitals with a variety of infections. Its level can be used to identify the presence of infection. The aim of this review is to assess how useful PCT is as a biomarker in supporting clinicians' assessment of patients with suspected appendicitis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out, yielding a total of 16 primary research papers deemed appropriate for appraisal.

RESULTS

The usefulness of PCT in aiding the diagnosis of AA depends on the severity of appendicitis. Patients who experience complicated appendicitis (CAA) such as perforation, gangrene, or necrosis have a significantly raised PCT level (p<0.05) compared to those with uncomplicated appendicitis (UAA) and a variety of other non-appendiceal intra-abdominal pathologies.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of PCT in UAA is weak, however, PCT was deemed useful in helping predict CAA, thus helping portray the severity of infection. This, in turn, will help ensure patients are taken to the operating theatre in a timely and safe manner for subsequent appendicectomy.

A comparative study on the diagnostic validity of three scoring systems in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in emergency centres

Background

Considering the inconsistencies on the validity scoring systems in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, our aim was to compare the accuracy of the three Anderson, Alvarado and Alvarado + CRP scoring systems in the diagnosis of patients with suspected acute appendicitis.

Methods

This was a prospective observational study performed on patients 15–65 years complained of abdominal pain in the RLQ with a high clinical suspicion of acute appendicitis within two years. The scoring systems of Anderson, Alvarado, and Alvarado + CRP were recorded using a pre-prepared questionnaire by a senior emergency medicine assistant. Acute appendicitis was confirmed based on the histopathologic findings. Written informed consent was obtained from all the patients before entering the study.

Results

200 patients were enrolled in the study. In 159 cases diagnosed with appendicitis based on histopathological findings, Anderson, Alvarado, and Alvarado scoring systems were able to identify 121, 152, and 147 cases respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy were 77%, 19%, 78%, 17 and 64% in Anderson, 95%, 7%, 75%, 30% and 77% in Alvarado, and 92%, 7%, 79%, 20%, and 75% in Alvarado + CRP scoring systems, respectively.

Conclusion

Anderson scoring system had lower diagnostic accuracy than the Alvarado system. The role of CRP as an adjunct test to increase the accuracy of the Alvarado scoring system in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis has been under question. Given the inconsistent results of the scoring systems in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, there is a need to develop a more precise clinical-paraclinical scoring system for this condition.

Clinical prediction of complicated appendicitis: A case-control study utilizing logistic regression

BACKGROUND

Since high-quality evidence on conservative treatment of acute appendicitis using antibiotics has increased, differentiation of patients with complicated appendicitis (CA) from those with simple appendicitis (SA) has become increasingly important. Previous studies have revealed that male gender, advanced age, comorbid conditions, prehospital delay, fever, and anorexia are risk factors of perforated appendicitis. Elevated serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level and hyponatremia have also been reported as predictive biomarkers of CA. However, confounding between various factors is problematic because most previous studies were limited to univariate analysis.

AIM

To evaluate non-laboratory and laboratory predictive factors of CA using logistic regression analyses.

METHODS

We performed an exploratory, single-center, retrospective case-control study that evaluated 198 patients (83.9%) with SA and 38 patients (16.1%) with CA. Diagnoses were confirmed by computed tomography images for all cases. We compared age, sex, onset-to-visit interval, epigastric/periumbilical pain, right lower quadrant pain, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, anorexia, medical history (of previous non-surgically treated appendicitis, diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, liver cirrhosis, hemodialysis, chronic lung diseases, malignant tumors, immunosuppressant use, and antiplatelet use), vital signs, physical findings, and laboratory data to select the explanatory variates for logistic regression. Based on the univariate comparisons, we performed logistic regression for clinical differentiation between CA and SA using only non-laboratory factors and also including both non-laboratory and laboratory factors.

RESULTS

The 236 eligible patients consisted of 198 patients (83.9%) with SA and 38 patients (16.1%) with CA. The median ages were 34 years old [interquartile ranges (IR), 24-45 years] in the SA group and 49 years old (IR, 35-63 years) in the CA group (P < 0.001). The median onset-to-visit interval was 1 d (IR, 0-1) and 1 d (IR, 1-2) in the SA and CA groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Heart rate, body temperature, and serum CRP level in the CA group were significantly higher than in the SA group; glomerular filtration rate and serum sodium were significantly lower in the CA group. Anorexia was significantly more prevalent in the CA group. The regression model including age, onset-to-visit interval, anorexia, tachycardia, and fever as non-laboratory predictive factors of CA (Model 1) showed that age ≥ 65 years old, longer onset-to-visit interval, and anorexia had significantly high odds ratios. The logistic regression for prediction of CA including age, onset-to-visit interval, anorexia, serum CRP level, hyponatremia (serum sodium < 135 mEq/L), and glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² (Model 2) showed that only elevated CRP levels had significantly high odds ratios. Under the curve values of receiver operating characteristics curves of each regression model were 0.74 for Model 1 and 0.87 for Model 2.

CONCLUSION

Our logistic regression analysis on differentiating factors of CA from SA showed that high CRP level was a strong dose-dependent predictor of CA.