Cargando…

Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals

Introduction There are a variety of conflicting recommendations in the literature for pre-operative imaging in acute appendicitis. There is debate over what the ideal imaging protocol is to lower the negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) without increasing missed appendicitis. The aim of this study is...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Symonds, Tristan, Buschel, Helen, Avramovic, John, Palamuthusingam, Pranavan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9830005/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36632248
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.32389
_version_ 1784867575657660416
author Symonds, Tristan
Buschel, Helen
Avramovic, John
Palamuthusingam, Pranavan
author_facet Symonds, Tristan
Buschel, Helen
Avramovic, John
Palamuthusingam, Pranavan
author_sort Symonds, Tristan
collection PubMed
description Introduction There are a variety of conflicting recommendations in the literature for pre-operative imaging in acute appendicitis. There is debate over what the ideal imaging protocol is to lower the negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) without increasing missed appendicitis. The aim of this study is to compare the audited NAR between two groups with different imaging approaches: (i) mandatory pre-operative computed tomography (CT) imaging and (ii) selective imaging with CT, ultrasound (US), or no imaging prior to appendicectomy. Materials and methods A retrospective chart audit was conducted of 400 patients who underwent an appendicectomy at two hospitals with different approaches to pre-operative imaging (hospital A and hospital B). The primary outcome measure was histologically confirmed appendicitis. It was also documented whether there was radiological (CT or US) evidence of appendicitis.  Results At hospital A, all 200 patients underwent CT imaging prior to appendicectomy. The total histologically confirmed NAR for this group was 9.5% (19/200). At hospital B, 97 (48.5%) patients underwent CT, 41 (25.5%) underwent US, 10 (5%) had both US and CT, and 52 (26%) had no imaging. The total NAR was 11.5% (23/200). Conclusion There was no statistically significant difference (p=0.62) in audited NARs when comparing clinician-guided selective imaging versus routine CT imaging for all patients undergoing appendicectomy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9830005
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98300052023-01-10 Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals Symonds, Tristan Buschel, Helen Avramovic, John Palamuthusingam, Pranavan Cureus Emergency Medicine Introduction There are a variety of conflicting recommendations in the literature for pre-operative imaging in acute appendicitis. There is debate over what the ideal imaging protocol is to lower the negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) without increasing missed appendicitis. The aim of this study is to compare the audited NAR between two groups with different imaging approaches: (i) mandatory pre-operative computed tomography (CT) imaging and (ii) selective imaging with CT, ultrasound (US), or no imaging prior to appendicectomy. Materials and methods A retrospective chart audit was conducted of 400 patients who underwent an appendicectomy at two hospitals with different approaches to pre-operative imaging (hospital A and hospital B). The primary outcome measure was histologically confirmed appendicitis. It was also documented whether there was radiological (CT or US) evidence of appendicitis.  Results At hospital A, all 200 patients underwent CT imaging prior to appendicectomy. The total histologically confirmed NAR for this group was 9.5% (19/200). At hospital B, 97 (48.5%) patients underwent CT, 41 (25.5%) underwent US, 10 (5%) had both US and CT, and 52 (26%) had no imaging. The total NAR was 11.5% (23/200). Conclusion There was no statistically significant difference (p=0.62) in audited NARs when comparing clinician-guided selective imaging versus routine CT imaging for all patients undergoing appendicectomy. Cureus 2022-12-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9830005/ /pubmed/36632248 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.32389 Text en Copyright © 2022, Symonds et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Emergency Medicine
Symonds, Tristan
Buschel, Helen
Avramovic, John
Palamuthusingam, Pranavan
Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals
title Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals
title_full Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals
title_fullStr Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals
title_full_unstemmed Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals
title_short Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals
title_sort routine computed tomography versus selective imaging: an audit of negative appendicectomy rates in two hospitals
topic Emergency Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9830005/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36632248
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.32389
work_keys_str_mv AT symondstristan routinecomputedtomographyversusselectiveimaginganauditofnegativeappendicectomyratesintwohospitals
AT buschelhelen routinecomputedtomographyversusselectiveimaginganauditofnegativeappendicectomyratesintwohospitals
AT avramovicjohn routinecomputedtomographyversusselectiveimaginganauditofnegativeappendicectomyratesintwohospitals
AT palamuthusingampranavan routinecomputedtomographyversusselectiveimaginganauditofnegativeappendicectomyratesintwohospitals