Objective: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of the Alvarado score for the de Alvarado como recurso clínico para el diagnóstico de la apendicitis aguda. de escalas diagnósticas de apendicitis aguda: Alvarado, RIPASA y AIR and has better accuracy for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Introducción: la apendicitis aguda constituye la primera causa de Los mejores valores diagnósticos de la enfermedad para la escala fueron aquellos con.
|Published (Last):||10 December 2007|
|PDF File Size:||16.21 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||7.58 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Regarding the operation, all appendectomies were open surgeries; in 69, the McBurney-type incision was used, while 31 were performed with a midline laparotomy.
Resultados Se incluyeron pacientes. The purpose of our study was to compare the ability of two clinical scoring systems, the Alvarado and the RIPASA scores, to diagnose or rule out appendicitis since computed tomography, ultrasound and laparoscopy have not been able to reduce the percentage of diagnostic error.
It should be mentioned critefios axial tomography is not a study that is routinely requested at our hospital in cases of suspected AA.
Different scoring systems have been created to increase diagnostic accuracy, and they are inexpensive, noninvasive, and easy to use and reproduce.
To improve ctiterios services and products, we use “cookies” own or third parties authorized to show advertising related to client preferences through the analyses of navigation customer behavior. The authors have no conflict of interests to declare related with this research. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the Alvarado and RIPASA scores in the clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis and to correlate with the histopathological results.
In all patients, complete analysis and urinalysis were requested; abdominal ultrasound was requested in 21 patients, in addition to abdominal X-rays, and in 66 patients only abdominal X-rays were requested, since the probable diagnosis of AA was basically clinical as was the decision to carry out the surgical intervention. The result consists of criterioe sum of the values, with a maximum score of agudda The pathology report was obtained and the efficacy of both scores for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis was compared.
An adequate clinical scoring system would avoid diagnostic errors, maintaining a satisfactory low rate of negative appendectomies by adequate patient alvararo, while limiting patient exposure to ionizing radiation, since there apendicits an increased risk of developing cancer with computed tomography, particularly for the pediatric age group.
Once the score is established, the diagnosis of appendicitis is classified as doubtful with less than 5 points, suggestive from 5 to 6 points, probable from 7 to 8 points, and very probable from 9 to 10 points. The distribution of AA cases was similar to other reports, predominantly affecting patients between the second and apenricitis decades of life. ROC curves obtained by calculating the results of both scores. A comparison with the modified Alvarado score.
APENDICITIS by Gustavo Rondon on Prezi
The average positive Apenducitis of all the studies included in Table 4 for the Alvarado score was calculated at 3.
There were no deaths during the present study. Depending on clinical judgment of the doctor’s appendectomy was performed.
There was a problem providing the content you requested
Mean patient age was Chalya BMC surgery Emerg Med J, 33pp. Skip to search form Skip to main content. The Alvarado score suggests, with a higher score, the probability that the patient has AA symptoms.
Contact Us Crietrios Feedback.
Several scoring systems have been developed for the early and equivocal diagnosis of this entity, one of these scales is the modified Alvarado, most used in the Western population; however, the RIPASA scale emerges in showing high sensitivity and specificity for Asian and Eastern populations, there are few studies in Western populations of this new scale. A descriptive statistical analysis of the demographic data of the population was completed, as well as the analysis of diagnostic tests, using the pathology report as a gold standard sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV], negative predictive value [NPV].
Excess weight and obesity. The average hospital stay was 3. Out of the total, 70 patients received prior medical management, 65 The higher the score obtained, the greater the probability that the patient has AA. The clinical and economic correlates of misdiagnosed appendicitis nationwide analysis.
The average time between the onset of the symptoms and the first medical assessment was Arch Surg,pp. Results One hundred patients were included. Ann Emerg Med, 64pp. Within the studies comparing both systems Table 4Chong et al.
Lavarado billion dollars are spent each year on negative appendectomies, 4,5 so high rates of negative appendectomies are no longer acceptable. En el surge la escala RIPASA mostrando alta sensibilidad y especificidad para poblaciones orientales, muy pocos son los estudios en poblaciones occidentales. The study was approved by the hospital’s Ethics Aalvarado.