Acute appendicitis: Comparison of low-dose and standard-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT

被引:87
作者
Keyzer, C
Tack, D
de Maertelaer, V
Bohy, P
Gevenois, PA
Van Gansbeke, D
机构
[1] Free Univ Brussels, Hop Erasme, Dept Radiol, B-1070 Brussels, Belgium
[2] Free Univ Brussels, Stat Unit, Inst Rech Interdisciplinaire Biol Humaine & Mol, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium
关键词
appendicitis; appendix; computed tomography (CT); multidetector row; radiation exposure;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2321031115
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: To prospectively compare low- and standard-dose unenhanced multidetector row computed tomography (CT) in patients suspected of having acute appendicitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-five consecutive patients underwent two unenhanced multi-detector row CT examinations with 4 x 2.5-mm collimation, 120 kVp, and 30 and 100 effective mAs. Two radiologists independently read the images obtained at each dose during two sessions. Readers recorded visualization of the appendix and presence of gas in its lumen, appendicolith, periappendiceal fat stranding, cecal wall thickening, and abscess or phlegmon to measure the diameter of the appendix and to propose diagnosis (appendicitis or alternative). Data were compared according to dose and reader, with definite diagnosis established on basis of surgical findings (n = 37) or clinical follow-up. chi(2) tests and logistic regression were used. Measurement agreements were assessed with Cohen K statistics, RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients had a definite diagnosis of appendicitis. No difference was observed between the frequency of visualization of the appendix (P = .874) neither in its mean diameter (P = .101-696, according to readers and sessions) nor in the readers' overall diagnosis (P = .788) at each dose. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of each sign were not different between doses. Fat stranding, appendicolith, and diameter were the most predictive signs, regardless of dose, yielding approximately 90% of correct diagnoses. The ability to propose a correct alternative diagnosis was not influenced by the dose. CONCLUSION: Low-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT has similar diagnostic performance as standard-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. (C) RSNA, 2004.
引用
收藏
页码:164 / 172
页数:9
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1997, WHO TECHN REP SER
[2]  
ARMITAGE P, 1998, ENCY BIOSTATISTICS, V3, P2163
[3]   ACUTE APPENDICITIS - CT AND US CORRELATION IN 100 PATIENTS [J].
BALTHAZAR, EJ ;
BIRNBAUM, BA ;
YEE, J ;
MEGIBOW, AJ ;
ROSHKOW, J ;
GRAY, C .
RADIOLOGY, 1994, 190 (01) :31-35
[4]   Frequency of visualization and thickness of normal appendix at nonenhanced helical CT [J].
Benjaminov, O ;
Atri, M ;
Hamilton, P ;
Rappaport, D .
RADIOLOGY, 2002, 225 (02) :400-406
[5]   APPENDICITIS NEAR ITS CENTENARY [J].
BERRY, J ;
MALT, RA .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 1984, 200 (05) :567-575
[6]   Appendicitis at the millennium [J].
Birnbaum, BA ;
Wilson, SR .
RADIOLOGY, 2000, 215 (02) :337-348
[7]   A COEFFICIENT OF AGREEMENT FOR NOMINAL SCALES [J].
COHEN, J .
EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1960, 20 (01) :37-46
[8]  
Dawson B., 1990, BASIC CLIN BIOSTATIS, V1st, P58
[9]   Diagnostic value of unenhanced helical CT in adult patients with suspected acute appendicitis [J].
Ege, G ;
Akman, H ;
Sahin, A ;
Bugra, D ;
Kuzucu, K .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2002, 75 (897) :721-725
[10]   Has misdiagnosis of appendicitis decreased over time? A population-based analysis [J].
Flum, DR ;
Morris, A ;
Koepsell, T ;
Dellinger, EP .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2001, 286 (14) :1748-1753