Diagnostic Utility of Ultrasound in Acute Appendicitis in Correlation with Total Leukocyte Count
Keywords:
Ultrasonography, Appendix. Appendicitis, AppendicectomyAbstract
Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of ultrasound (US) in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in correlation with total
leukocyte count (TLC).
Materials and Methods: This cross sectional comparative study was conducted at the Radiology and Pathology Departments
of CMH Lahore from 1st February 2007 to 31st January 2008. A total of 125 suspectedpatientsof appendicitis were included in
the study through non-probability purposive sampling. They all underwent US evaluation and laboratory assessment (TLC).
Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of US findings and TLC were
calculated keeping surgical findings and histopathology of the removed appendix as gold standard whenever appendecectomy
was carried out.
Results:Among 62 patients finally proven to be suffering from acute appendicitis US correctly diagnosed the same in 55 (89%),
whereas a normal appendix was visualized in 30 (48%) out of the remaining 63 non – appendicitis patients. The most accurate
appendiceal finding for appendicitis was adiameter of 6 mm or larger, with a sensitivity of 96%, specificity of 97%,NPV of
98%, and PPV of 98%.The lack of visualization of the appendixwith US had a NPV of 82%. An increase in TLC had a PPV
of 66%, whereas normal TLC had a NPV of 73% whereas those of US were 96% and 90% respectively. By utilizing US as an
adjunct to clinical evaluation, negative appendectomy rate was lessened to 3.2%.
Conclusion: US have better diagnostic utility than TLC in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.
References
Primatesta P, Goldacre MJ. Appendicectomy for acute appendicitis and for other conditions: an epidemiological study. Int J Epidemiol. 1994; 23(1):155-60.
Iqbal M. Appendicitis: a diagnostic dilemma. Rawal Med J Dec 2005; 30(2):51-2.
Owings MF, Kozak LJ. Ambulatory and inpatient proc-edures in the United States, 1996. Vital and health statistics. Series 13. No. 139. Hyattsville, Md.: National Center for Health Statistics, November 1998:26. (DHHS publication no. (PHS) 99-1710.
FlumDR, Koepsell T. The clinical and economic correlates of misdiagnosed appendicitis: nationwide analysis. Arch Surg 2002; 137:799-804.
Kozar RA, Roslyn JJ. The appendix. In: Schwartz SI, Shires GT, Spencer FC, Daly JM, Fischer JE, Galloway AC, eds. Principles of Surgery. 7th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Health Professions Division; 1999. P.1383-94.
Paulson EK, Kalady MF, Pappas TN. Suspected appendi-citis. N Engl J Med 2003; 348:236-42.
Applegate KE, Sivit CJ, Salvator AE. Effect of crosssectional imaging on negative appendectomy and perforation rates in children. Radiology 2001; 220:103-7.
Ahmad N, Abid KJ, Khan AZ, Shah TA. Acute Appendicitis - Incidence of Negative Appendicectomies. Ann of King Edward Med Coll Mar 2002; 8(1):32-4.
Ali N, Sadiq M, Bacha J, Hadi G. Correlation of clinical and histological diagnosis of acute Appendicitis. J Postgrad Med Inst Jun 2003; 17(2):254-7.
Grönroos JM, Grönroos P. Diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Radiology 2001; 219:297-8.
Pieper R, Kager L, Nasman P. Acute appendicitis: a clinical study of 1018 cases of emergency appendectomy. Acta-ChirScand 1982; 148:51-62.
Flum DR, Morris A, Koepsell T. Has misdiagnosis of appendicitis decreased over time? JAMA 2001; 286:1748 -53
Field S, Morrison I. Acute Abdomen. In: Sutton D. Text-book of Radiology and Imaging Volume I. 7th ed. China Churchil Livingstone; 2003.p. 684.
Azmoun L, Aliabadi P, Holman H. Acute Appendicitis. [Cited 1995 Dec 12]. Available from: URL: http://brigha-mrad.harvard.edu/cases/bwh/hcache/112/full.html
Lim HK, Lee WJ, Lee SJ, Namgung S, Lim JH. Focal appendicitis confined to the tip: diagnosis at US. Radiology 1996; 200:799-801.
Ooms HWA, Koumans RKJ, Ho Kang You PJ, Puylaert JB. Ultrasonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Br J Surg 1991; 78:315-8.
Fefferman NR, Roche KJ, Pinkney LP, Ambrosino MM, Genieser NB. Suspected appendicitis in children: focused CT technique for evaluation. Radiology 2001; 220:691-5.
Rettenbacher T, Hollerweger A, Macheiner P, Rettenbacher L, Tomaselli F, Schneider B et.al. Outer diameter of the vermiform appendix as a sign of acute appendicitis: evaluation at US. Radiology. 2001 Mar; 218(3):757-62.
Rioux M. Sonographic detection of the normal and abnor-mal appendix. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992; 158:773-8.
Yabunaka K, Katsuda T, Sanada S, Fukutomi T. Sonog-raphic Appearance of the Normal Appendix in Adults. J Ultrasound Med. 2007 Jan; 26(1):37-43.
Lee JH, Jeong YK, Park KB, Park JK, Jeong AK, Hwang JC. Operator-dependent techniques for graded compression sonography to detect the appendix and diagnose acute appendicitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184:91–7.
Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA, McCabe CJ, Lawrason JN, Berger DL, et al. Helical CT technique forthe diagnosis of appendicitis: prospective evaluation of a focused appe-ndix CT examination. Radiology 1997; 202: 139–44.
Jain KA, Quam JP, Ablin DS, Gerscovich EO, Shelton DK. Imaging findings in patients with right lower quadrant pain: alter diagnoses to appendicitis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21:693-8.
Sivit CJ, Newman KD, Chandra RS. Visualization of enl-arged mesenteric lymph nodes at US examination: clinical significance. Pediatr Radiol 1993; 23:471-5.
Khan JS, Hassan H, Khan J A. Investigations for Acute Appendicitis: Can we rely on them? Pak J Surg Dec 2002; 18(2):27-30.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Muhammad Adeel Azhar, Atif Latif, Mashkoor Ahmad, Faisal Mahmood
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Journal of Bahria University Medical & Dental College is an open access journal and is licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0. which permits unrestricted non commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 
