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):||28 July 2013|
|PDF File Size:||19.83 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||11.52 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Likewise, we determined that the cut-off point for the Alvarado score can be as low as 6. After patients were discharged, they were followed-up in the outpatient setting for at least 30 days.
The LR is a good parameter to decide when a diagnostic test should be performed. 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.
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.
Singapore Med J, 51pp. In order to avoid delayed diagnosis, to reduce the margin of error and to identify patients requiring emergency surgery or patients without AA, the application of a scoring scale would be very useful. Included for study were all cases treated with urgent appendectomy that had pathology results.
Some features of this site may not work without it.
Lancet,pp. The average time that elapsed from the initial assessment by the surgeon until the surgical resolution was 8. Upon applying the grading systems to the patients in the study, we qguda that the RIPASA score showed greater diagnostic certainty compared to the Alvarado score, with a sensitivity of The pathology report was obtained and the efficacy of both scores for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis was compared.
Int J Surg, 10pp.
Our research assessed the utility of such scales in the population of the eastern region of the country, and greater sensitivity and specificity were found with the RIPASA score. Prospective evaluation of the ability of clinical scoring systems and physician-determined likelihood of appendicitis apencicitis obviate the need for CT. To improve our 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.
Contact Us Send Feedback. The sensitivity and specificity of Modified Alvarado scale were In order to avoid delay in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and reduce the margin of criterlos, the use of scales has been used.
There was a problem providing the content you requested
ROC curves obtained by calculating the results of both scores. Se continuar a navegar, consideramos que aceita o seu uso. Excess weight and obesity. Rev Hosp Juarez Mex, 76pp. The higher the score obtained, the greater the probability that the patient has AA.
APENDICITIS by Gustavo Rondon on Prezi
The differences observed between both scores were not statistically significant. Except where otherwise noted, this item’s license is described as info: You can change the settings or obtain more information by clicking here. Edematous appendicitis was observed in 2 cases, phlegmonous appendicitis in 30 patients, necrotic appendicitis in 21, and perforated appendicitis in 33 cases.
It should be mentioned that axial tomography is not a study that is routinely requested at our hospital in cases of suspected AA. The average hospital stay was 3. Postoperative complications occurred in 8 patients 4 seromas, 2 infections of the surgical site and 2 residual abscesses.
There were no deaths during the present study.
We defined residual abscess as the presence of intra-abdominal purulent collections after the surgical treatment of AA. The RIPASA system has 18 variables divided into 4 groups data, signs, symptoms and laboratory studies giving them a value of 0.
Methods An analytical, observational study was conducted between June 1 and December apendicitid, 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.
Rawal Med J, 38 apedicitis, pp. 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.
An adequate clinical scoring system would avoid diagnostic errors, maintaining a satisfactory low rate of negative appendectomies by adequate patient stratification, while limiting patient exposure to ionizing radiation, since there is an increased risk of developing cancer with computed tomography, particularly for the pediatric age group.