JUM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Order Full text via Infotrieve
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Worrell, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Fleischer, A. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Worrell, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Fleischer, A. C.

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, Vol 9, Issue 3 145-150, Copyright © 1990 by American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Graded compression ultrasound in the diagnosis of appendicitis. A comparison of diagnostic criteria

J. A. Worrell, L. F. Drolshagen, T. C. Kelly, D. W. Hunton, G. R. Durmon and A. C. Fleischer
Department of Radiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee 37232-2675.

Four sonographic diagnostic criteria for appendicitis, (1) any visualization, (2) appendiceal diameter greater than 6.0 mm, (3) muscular wall thickness greater than or equal to 3.0 mm, and (4) presence of a complex mass, were compared in a series of 200 patients clinically suspected of having appendicitis. The diagnosis of appendicitis was confirmed histopathologically and included all forms of appendicitis with mucosal invasion by inflammatory cells. The sensitivities of all the criteria were low (11% to 75%) and the usefulness of this test as a screening procedure is questioned. The combined criteria of an appendix with a muscular wall thickness (MWT) greater than or equal to 3.0 mm and visualization of a complex mass (CM) separate from the adnexa in females proved most useful as a diagnostic test (sensitivity, 68%; specificity, 98%). We conclude that the diagnosis of appendicitis is still difficult, despite the addition of graded compression ultrasound as a diagnostic test. We do not recommend its use as the only screening test, but do recommend it, rather, in a diagnostic role after the initial clinical screening.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
T. Terasawa, C. C. Blackmore, S. Bent, and R. J. Kohlwes
Systematic Review: Computed Tomography and Ultrasonography To Detect Acute Appendicitis in Adults and Adolescents
Ann Intern Med, October 5, 2004; 141(7): 537 - 546.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch SurgHome page
K. Soda, K. Nemoto, S. Yoshizawa, T. Hibiki, K. Shizuya, and F. Konishi
Detection of Pinpoint Tenderness on the Appendix Under Ultrasonography Is Useful to Confirm Acute Appendicitis
Arch Surg, October 1, 2001; 136(10): 1136 - 1140.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. Baldisserotto and E. Marchiori
Accuracy of Noncompressive Sonography of Children with Appendicitis According to the Potential Positions of the Appendix
Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2000; 175(5): 1387 - 1392.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
Y. Kaakaji, H. V. Nghiem, C. Nodell, and T. C. Winter
Sonography of Obstetric and Gynecologic Emergencies: Part II, Gynecologic Emergencies
Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2000; 174(3): 651 - 656.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1990 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.