Characterization and quantification of fluid in the abdomen by ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in children with clinical suspicion of appendicitis

PURPOSE

While regarded as a secondary sign of pediatric appendicitis, the frequency of physiologic intra-abdominal fluid in children with suspected but absent appendicitis is unknown. Ex vivo: to assess the validity of US/MRI measurements of free fluid. In vivo: in suspected pediatric appendicitis, to assess the amount of abdominal fluid by US and MRI, determine performance characteristics of US in fluid detection and identify fluid volume ranges in confirmed appendicitis.

METHODS

Ex vivo: criterion validity of US and MRI for fluid volume measurements was tested using tissue-mimicking phantoms filled with different volumes of distilled water. In vivo: all participants from a previous prospective study of suspected appendicitis were evaluated by US; MRI was performed after equivocal USs. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of abdominal fluid and correlation of fluid presence with appendicitis were performed.

RESULTS

Ex vivo: no difference was found between phantom-fluid amount and measured volume using the formula for volume of an ellipsoid for US (P=0.19) or MRI (P=0.08). In vivo: intra-abdominal fluid was present in 212/591 (35.9%) patients; 75/212 patients with fluid (35.4%) had appendicitis, 60 (28.3%) had alternate diagnoses, and 77 (36.3%) had physiologic fluid. Sensitivity and specificity of US for fluid detection were 84% (95% CI 71-93) and 65% (95% CI 52-77), respectively. In children with versus without appendicitis, the respective ranges of fluid volume were 0.7-1148.8 ml and 0.8-318 ml.

CONCLUSION

The volume of an ellipsoid formula is a valid method for quantifying intra-abdominal fluid. The sole presence of intra-abdominal fluid on US does not support the diagnosis of pediatric appendicitis.

Non-traumatic bladder rupture

Spontaneous bladder rupture, while rare, carries a high risk of morbidity and mortality if left untreated. Here, we describe a case report of spontaneous bladder rupture in a patient initially presenting with foley malfunction. Despite foley replacement, the patient continued to endorse abdominal pain and clinically deteriorate, thus raising our suspicion for possible bladder rupture. Recognizing and understanding the different variations of spontaneous bladder rupture is paramount for timely appropriate intervention.

A cross-sectional survey

Physical examination (PE) has always been a corner stone of medical practice. The recent advances in imaging and fading of doctors' ability in performing it, however, raised doubts on PE usefulness. Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) is gaining ground in medicine with the detection of free fluids being one of its main applications. To estimate physicians' confidence and use of PE and POCUS for the detection of abdominal or pleural free fluid, we conducted a cross-sectional survey. In all, 246 internal and emergency medicine physicians answered to the survey (197 in-hospital physicians and 49 general practitioners; response rate 28.5%). Almost all declared to perform PE in case of suspected ascites or pleural effusion (88% and 90%, respectively). The highest rates of confidence were observed in conventional PE signs (91% for diminished breath sounds, 80% for dullness to thorax percussion, and 66% for abdominal flank dullness). For the remaining signs, rates of confidence were less than 53%. Physicians with > 15 years of experience and POCUS-naïve doctors reported higher confidence in PE. Most of emergency and almost half of internal medicine physicians (78% and 44%, respectively) attended a structured POCUS course. POCUS use was higher among trained physicians for both ascites (84% vs 50%, p < 0.001) and pleural effusion (80% vs 34%, p < 0.001). Similarly, higher POCUS use was observed in younger physicians. In conclusion, PE is frequently performed and rates of confidence are low for most PE signs, especially among young doctors and POCUS users. This detailed inventory suggests an ongoing shift towards POCUS integration in clinical practice.

Diagnostic point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) for gastrointestinal pathology: state of the art from basics to advanced

The use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) by non-radiologists has dramatically increased. POCUS is completely different from the routine radiological studies. POCUS is a Physiological, On spot, extension of the Clinical examination, that is Unique, and Safe. This review aims to lay the basic principles of using POCUS in diagnosing intestinal pathologies so as to encourage acute care physicians to learn and master this important tool. It will be a useful primer for clinicians who want to introduce POCUS into their clinical practice. It will cover the basic physics, technical aspects, and simple applications including detection of free fluid, free intraperitoneal air, and bowel obstruction followed by specific POCUS findings of the most common intestinal pathologies encountered by acute care physicians including acute appendicitis, epiploic appendagitis, acute diverticulitis, pseudomembranous colitis, intestinal tuberculosis, Crohn’s disease, and colonic tumours. Deep understanding of the basic physics of ultrasound and its artefacts is the first step in mastering POCUS. This helps reaching an accurate POCUS diagnosis and avoiding its pitfalls. With increased skills, detailed and accurate POCUS findings of specific intestinal pathologies can be achieved and properly correlated with the clinical picture. We have personally experienced and enjoyed this approach to a stage that an ultrasound machine is always accompanying us in our clinical on calls and rounds.

Senior general surgery residents can be trained to perform focused assessment with sonography for trauma patients accurately

PURPOSES

Researchers studying trauma have found that physicians are able to perform a focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) with minimal training and achieve ideal accuracy. However, there are currently no consensus or standard guidelines regarding the performance of this assessment. The aim of our study was to clarify the value of FAST performed by well-qualified senior general surgery residents in cases of suspected blunt abdominal trauma, which presents an important diagnostic problem in emergency departments.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study in the emergency department (ED) of our hospital performed from January 2011 to September 2013. Patients were included if they (1) had undergone a FAST examination performed by qualified residents and (2) had received subsequent formal radiographic or surgical evaluations. The results were compared against subsequent surgical findings or formal Department of Radiology reference standards.

RESULTS

Among the 438 patients enrolled, false-negative results were obtained in 8 and false-positive results in 5. Only one patient was missed and required laparotomy to repair a small intestine perforation. The sensitivity and specificity were 87 and 99%, respectively; the accuracy was 97%.

CONCLUSIONS

Senior general surgery residents can be trained to perform accurate FAST examinations on trauma patients.