View in EDS

Ultrasonography/MRI Versus CT for Diagnosis Appendicitis.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Ultrasonography/MRI Versus CT for Diagnosis Appendicitis.
Authors: Aspelund, Gudrun, Fingeret, Abbey, Gross, Erica, Kessler, David, Keung, Connie, Thirumoorthi, Arul, Pilyung Stephen Oh, Behr, Gerald, Chen, Susie, Lampl, Brooke, Middlesworth, William, Kandel, Jessica, Ruzal-Shapiro, Carrie
Source: Pediatrics. Apr2014, Vol. 133 Issue 4, p586-593. 8p. 2 Diagrams, 6 Charts.
Subjects: Appendicitis diagnosis, Appendectomy, Appendicitis, Confidence intervals, Magnetic resonance imaging, Tomography, Ultrasonic imaging, Predictive tests, Cross-sectional method, Retrospective studies, Symptoms, Children
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Cross-sectional imaging increases accuracy in diagnosing appendicitis. We hypothesized that a radiation-free imaging pathway of ultrasonography selectively followed by MRI would not change clinical end points compared with computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed children (<18 years old) who had diagnostic imaging for suspected acute appendicitis between November 2008 and October 2012. Before November 2010 CT was used as the primary imaging modality (group A); subsequently, ultrasonography was the primary imaging modality followed by MRI for equivocal findings (group B). Data collected included time from triage to imaging and treatment and results of imaging and pathology. RESULTS: Six hundred sixty-two patients had imaging for suspected appendicitis (group A = 265; group B = 397, of which 136 [51%] and 161 [41%], respectively, had positive imaging for appendicitis). Negative appendectomy rate was 2.5% for group A and 1.4% for group B. Perforation rate was similar for both groups. Time from triage to antibiotic administration and operation did not differ between groups A and B. There was higher proportion of positive imaging and appendectomies in group A and thus more negative imaging tests in group B (ultrasonography and MRI), but diagnostic accuracy of the 2 imaging pathways was similar. CONCLUSIONS: In children with suspected acute appendicitis, a radiation- free diagnostic imaging of ultrasonography selectively followed by MRI is feasible and comparable to CT, with no difference in time to antibiotic administration, time to appendectomy, negative appendectomy rate, perforation rate, or length of stay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Pediatrics is the property of American Academy of Pediatrics and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 95328066
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Ultrasonography/MRI Versus CT for Diagnosis Appendicitis.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: &lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Aspelund%2C+Gudrun%22&quot;&gt;Aspelund, Gudrun&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Fingeret%2C+Abbey%22&quot;&gt;Fingeret, Abbey&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Gross%2C+Erica%22&quot;&gt;Gross, Erica&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Kessler%2C+David%22&quot;&gt;Kessler, David&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Keung%2C+Connie%22&quot;&gt;Keung, Connie&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Thirumoorthi%2C+Arul%22&quot;&gt;Thirumoorthi, Arul&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Pilyung+Stephen+Oh%22&quot;&gt;Pilyung Stephen Oh&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Behr%2C+Gerald%22&quot;&gt;Behr, Gerald&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Chen%2C+Susie%22&quot;&gt;Chen, Susie&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Lampl%2C+Brooke%22&quot;&gt;Lampl, Brooke&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Middlesworth%2C+William%22&quot;&gt;Middlesworth, William&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Kandel%2C+Jessica%22&quot;&gt;Kandel, Jessica&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Ruzal-Shapiro%2C+Carrie%22&quot;&gt;Ruzal-Shapiro, Carrie&lt;/searchLink&gt;
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: &lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;JN&quot; term=&quot;%22Pediatrics%22&quot;&gt;Pediatrics&lt;/searchLink&gt;. Apr2014, Vol. 133 Issue 4, p586-593. 8p. 2 Diagrams, 6 Charts.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: &lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Appendicitis+diagnosis%22&quot;&gt;Appendicitis diagnosis&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Appendectomy%22&quot;&gt;Appendectomy&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Appendicitis%22&quot;&gt;Appendicitis&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Confidence+intervals%22&quot;&gt;Confidence intervals&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Magnetic+resonance+imaging%22&quot;&gt;Magnetic resonance imaging&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Tomography%22&quot;&gt;Tomography&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Ultrasonic+imaging%22&quot;&gt;Ultrasonic imaging&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Predictive+tests%22&quot;&gt;Predictive tests&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Cross-sectional+method%22&quot;&gt;Cross-sectional method&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Retrospective+studies%22&quot;&gt;Retrospective studies&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Symptoms%22&quot;&gt;Symptoms&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Children%22&quot;&gt;Children&lt;/searchLink&gt;
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: BACKGROUND: Cross-sectional imaging increases accuracy in diagnosing appendicitis. We hypothesized that a radiation-free imaging pathway of ultrasonography selectively followed by MRI would not change clinical end points compared with computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed children (&lt;18 years old) who had diagnostic imaging for suspected acute appendicitis between November 2008 and October 2012. Before November 2010 CT was used as the primary imaging modality (group A); subsequently, ultrasonography was the primary imaging modality followed by MRI for equivocal findings (group B). Data collected included time from triage to imaging and treatment and results of imaging and pathology. RESULTS: Six hundred sixty-two patients had imaging for suspected appendicitis (group A = 265; group B = 397, of which 136 [51%] and 161 [41%], respectively, had positive imaging for appendicitis). Negative appendectomy rate was 2.5% for group A and 1.4% for group B. Perforation rate was similar for both groups. Time from triage to antibiotic administration and operation did not differ between groups A and B. There was higher proportion of positive imaging and appendectomies in group A and thus more negative imaging tests in group B (ultrasonography and MRI), but diagnostic accuracy of the 2 imaging pathways was similar. CONCLUSIONS: In children with suspected acute appendicitis, a radiation- free diagnostic imaging of ultrasonography selectively followed by MRI is feasible and comparable to CT, with no difference in time to antibiotic administration, time to appendectomy, negative appendectomy rate, perforation rate, or length of stay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: &lt;i&gt;Copyright of Pediatrics is the property of American Academy of Pediatrics and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder&#39;s express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.&lt;/i&gt; (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=95328066
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1542/peds.2013-2128
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 8
        StartPage: 586
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Appendicitis diagnosis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Appendectomy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Appendicitis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Confidence intervals
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Magnetic resonance imaging
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Tomography
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ultrasonic imaging
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Predictive tests
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cross-sectional method
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Retrospective studies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Symptoms
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Children
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Ultrasonography/MRI Versus CT for Diagnosis Appendicitis.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Aspelund, Gudrun
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Fingeret, Abbey
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Gross, Erica
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kessler, David
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Keung, Connie
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Thirumoorthi, Arul
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Pilyung Stephen Oh
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Behr, Gerald
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chen, Susie
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Lampl, Brooke
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Middlesworth, William
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kandel, Jessica
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ruzal-Shapiro, Carrie
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 04
              Text: Apr2014
              Type: published
              Y: 2014
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 00314005
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 133
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Pediatrics
              Type: main
ResultId 1