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):||18 August 2015|
|PDF File Size:||11.66 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.30 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Except where otherwise noted, this item’s license is described as info: J Clin Diagn Res, 8pp. Some authors have also shown their advantage over imaging studies, 16 although this has not been confirmed by others.
A practical score for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis. The purpose of our study was to compare the ability of two clinical scoring systems, the Alvarado and 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 purpose of this study was to apply both scales in the emergency department in cases of patients with presumptive diagnosis of AA and to compare these with the pathology reports after appendectomy, thereby comparing the efficacy, sensitivity and specificity of the Alvarado and Agudq scores in the diagnosis of AA at a tertiary hospital serving the population of eastern Mexico.
The RIPASA system has 18 variables divided into 4 groups data, signs, symptoms and laboratory studies giving them a value of 0. Critefios differences observed between both scores were not statistically significant.
Evaluation of the Alvarado score in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Out of the total, 70 patients received xpendicitis medical management, 65 Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: The mean body mass index was The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the Alvarado and RIPASA scores in the clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis agda to correlate with the histopathological results.
Topics Discussed in This Paper.
The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the Alvarado and RIPASA scores in the clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis and to correlate with the histopathological results. The d report was obtained and the efficacy of both scores for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis was compared. We performed an analysis for diagnostic tests sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, false positive, false negative wlvarado comparative ROC curves for both scales.
Vera aPedro M.
In order to avoid delay in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and reduce the margin of error, aguva use of scales has been used. Resultados Se incluyeron pacientes. The variability of figures observed between the studies may also be secondary to an effect of the population from which the sample was extracted.
En el surge la escala RIPASA mostrando alta sensibilidad y especificidad para poblaciones orientales, muy pocos son los estudios en poblaciones occidentales. Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs? Edematous appendicitis was observed in 2 cases, phlegmonous appendicitis in 30 patients, necrotic appendicitis in 21, and perforated appendicitis in 33 cases.
APENDICITIS by Gustavo Rondon on Prezi
Lancet,pp. Mean patient age was One of the researchers was responsible for coding patient data, using numbers instead of names. Included for study were all cases treated with urgent appendectomy that had pathology results.
The Alvarado system includes 3 symptoms, 3 physical signs and 2 laboratory parameters; each variable is assigned a value of 1 or 2 points. The clinical and economic correlates of misdiagnosed appendicitis nationwide analysis. In the case of our study, the positive LR was 3.
Distribution of the Variables of the Patients Included.
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 ve, there are few studies in Western populations of this new scale.
The anatomopathological diagnosis constituted the Standard Gold in this study. The further away from 1, the better the test is to differentiate between sick and healthy subjects. One hundred patients were included.
ROC curves obtained by atuda the results of both scores. Comparison of appendicitis clinical scoring systems with physician-determined likelihood of appendicitis Research Forum Abstract Chalya BMC surgery The 2 different classifications, the Alvarado and the RIPASA scores, were applied to each of the patients by a resident doctor in surgery, without influencing the surgeon’s decision regarding surgical intervention.
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.
There was a problem providing the content you requested
Alendicitis 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.
Introduction In order to avoid delay in critrrios diagnosis of acute appendicitis and reduce the margin of error, the use of scales has been used. The distribution of AA cases was similar to other reports, predominantly affecting patients between the second and fourth decades of life.