| Title |
Diagnostic reliability of pediatric appendicitis score, ultrasound and low-dose computed tomography scan in children with suspected acute appendicitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s134153 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ashraf Othman Sayed, Nancy Selim Zeidan, Dalia Monir Fahmy, Hossam A Ibrahim |
| Abstract |
Diagnosis of appendicitis in children is clinically challenging. Computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for diagnosis; however, radiation exposure early in life is a concern with this technique. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic reliability of low-dose CT, pediatric appendicitis score (PAS), and abdominal ultrasound (US) in children with acute appendicitis, to reach a safe diagnosis. This retrospective study was conducted on 140 children who were admitted with clinically suspected acute appendicitis (45 with positive appendicitis and 95 children with negative appendicitis). Low-dose CT was performed, and PAS was retrospectively calculated for all subjects. US was initially performed for 38 subjects. All results were compared with the final diagnosis reached by an operative, histopathological analysis and follow-up. Low-dose CT showed a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 97.8%, 100%, and 99.3%, respectively. At a cutoff value ≥5, PAS showed a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 95%, 84%, and 89%, respectively. Abdominal US examination showed sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 55.6%, 85%, and 71%, respectively. Implementing Poortman's model resulted in higher accuracy (92%) of US. There was a significant difference in accuracy between a low-dose CT and PAS on one side and between Poortman's model and US examination on the other side. A diagnostic scheme was suggested using PAS as the excluding tool (PAS ≤2 send home and ≥7 send directly to operation) followed by US examination and reserving low-dose CT for inconclusive cases. This scheme would eliminate the use of CT for at least 33.7% and in 7 cases who had initial US examination. Although CT remains the most accurate and less operator-dependent diagnostic tool for pediatric appendicitis, the radiation hazards could however be minimized using PAS as an excluding tool and US as the primary imaging modality followed by low-dose CT for inconclusive cases only. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 88 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Researcher | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 37 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 45% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 35 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,283,318
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#589
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,937
of 326,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#9
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.