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.
||7 January 2012
|PDF File Size:
|ePub File Size:
||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
The distribution of AA cases was similar to other reports, predominantly affecting patients between the second and fourth decades of life. High negative appendectomy rates are no longer acceptable. Once the score is established, the apendictis 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.
Leukocytosis higher than 10 In the handling of the data, confidentiality was maintained and patient anonymity was respected. Ann Emerg Med, 64pp. Xlvarado 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].
Showing of 15 references. Out of the total, 70 patients received prior medical management, 65 The further away from 1, the better the test is to differentiate between sick and healthy subjects.
We compared the sensitivity results of both classifications between patients with appendicitis; likewise, among patients without appendicitis akvarado compared the ve in terms of specificity McNemar’s test for paired data. Later, we calculated the LR for our results and for each of the previous similar reports Table 4. One billion dollars are spent each year on negative appendectomies, 4,5 so high rates of negative appendectomies are no longer acceptable.
Am J Surg,pp.
Se continuar a navegar, consideramos que aceita o seu uso. ROC curves were generated Fig.
Upon applying the grading systems to the patients in the study, we found that the RIPASA score showed greater diagnostic certainty compared to the Alvarado score, with a sensitivity of A comparison with the modified Alvarado score.
Introduction In order to avoid delay in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and reduce the margin of error, the use of scales has been used.
A practical score for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Distribution of the Variables of the Patients Included.
The aim of this study was to compare the ceiterios of the Alvarado and RIPASA scores in the clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis and to criterkos with the histopathological results. The purpose of our study was to compare the ability of two clinical scoring systems, the Alvarado ppara 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.
The average time between the onset of symptoms and the first medical assessment was The sensitivity and specificity of Modified Alvarado scale were 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.
The average positive LR of all the studies included in Table 4 for the Alvarado score was calculated at 3. Xriterios appendicitis NOS disorder Search for additional papers on this topic.
There was a problem providing the content you requested
Distribution of the Variables of the Patients Included. Int J Surg, 10pp. Except where otherwise noted, this item’s license is described as info: After patients were discharged, they were followed-up in the outpatient apwndicitis for at least 30 days. More than one patient presented more than one comorbidity.
ROC curves obtained by calculating the results of both scores. Has misdiagnosis of appendicitis decreased over time? Methods An analytical, observational study was conducted between June 1 and December 31, in patients of both sexes who were 18 years of age or older and came to the emergency department of the Hospital de Alta Especialidad of Veracruz with suspected diagnosis of AA and underwent appendectomy.
Dig Surg, 20pp. The average time that elapsed from the initial assessment by the surgeon until the surgical resolution was 8. The average time between the onset of the symptoms and the first medical assessment was The body mass index is calculated by dividing weight in kilos by height squared in meters.
The intraoperative findings for each of the patients were recorded, and the diagnosis of AA was confirmed with the pathology study of the excised appendix. General practitioners should be trained in the use of these scales to avoid delay in diagnosis. The pathology report was obtained and the efficacy of both scores for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis was compared. From This Paper Figures, tables, and topics from this paper.
The pathology report was obtained and the efficacy of both scores for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis was compared.
The study was approved by the hospital’s Ethics Committee. An analytical, observational study was conducted between June 1 and December 31, in patients of both sexes who were 18 years of age or older and came to the emergency department of the Hospital de Alta Especialidad of Veracruz with suspected diagnosis of AA and underwent appendectomy.