改良Alvarado评分对急性阑尾炎的诊断价值分析

目的 探讨改良Alvarado评分对急性阑尾炎诊断和治疗价值.方法 回顾我院自1985年1月至2009年12月间收治的行阑尾切除术并有完整临床资料的患者1637例,计算改良Alvarado评分,比较评分≥7分患者（833例）及＜7分患者（804例）的阴性切除率;计算评分的阳性预测率;并对评分结果和病理诊断进行相关分析.结果 评分≥7分患者阴性切除率明显低于评分〈7分患者,差异有统计学意义;评分阳性预测率为93.8%;评分分值和病理分型成正相关（r=0.637,P〈0.01）.结论 应用改良Alvarado评分能提高急性阑尾炎的诊断率,显著降低阴性阑尾切除率.     

血清血管内皮生长因子-C联合MDCT诊断胃癌淋巴结转移的可行性

目的探讨术前测定血清血管内皮生长因子-C（serum vascular endothelial growthfac—tor,SVEGF—c）浓度联合MDCT扫描能否判断胃癌淋巴结转移。方法ELISA方法测定80例胃癌患者及20例健康人SVEGF—C浓度,MDCT平扫及三期强化动态扫描,常规病理检查淋巴结有无转移。结果胃癌组SVEGF—C浓度为595．9±201．0pg／ml,对照组为360．0±97．4 pg／ml（P=0．000）;伴有淋巴结转移的58例胃癌患者SVEGF—C明显升高（650．9±198．6 vs．451．0±115．5 pg／ml,P〈0．01）;取临界点为542．5pg／ml时,SVEGF—C诊断淋巴结转移的敏感度为82．8％,特异度为81．8％,准确度为82．5％,阳性预测值为92．3％,阴性预测值为64．3％。MDCT诊断淋巴结转移的敏感度为51．7％,特异度为54．5％,准确度为52．5％,阳性预测值为75．0％,阴性预测值为30．0％。SVEGF—C联合MDCT诊断淋巴结转移的敏感度为91．4％,特异度为86．4％,准确度90％,阳性预测值94．6％,阴性预测值79．2％。结论术前SVEGF-C浓度测定可有效地判断胃癌淋巴结转移,联合MDCT扫描进一步提高准确度。     

核磁共振在需要活检的乳腺病灶诊断中的应用价值

目的探讨核磁共振（MRI）在需要活检乳腺病灶诊断中的应用价值。方法对接受诊治的108例患有乳腺疾病的妇女进行体格检查、超声检查和（或）乳腺X线检查,共发现116个病灶。在这些病灶中,三项检查中至少有一项提示恶性可能、需要接受手术活检。另外,在开放活检前还接受术前MRI检查。通过与病理对比,得出各影像学诊断的准确性。结果116个病灶中70个（60．3％）为恶性。超声检查的敏感性为83．3％,特异性为62．0％,准确性为74．1％,阳性预测值74．3％,阴性预测值73．8％。乳腺X线检查的敏感性为86．8％,特异性为68.1％,准确性为78．0％,阳性预测值75．4％,阴性预测值82．1％。MRI检查的敏感性为97.1％,特异性为73．9％,准确性为87．9％,阳性预测值85．0％,阴性预测值94．4％。结论MRI对需要活检的乳腺病灶诊断的敏感性、特异性、准确性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值均优于乳腺X线检查和超声检查,对临床上不可触及病灶的辅助诊断有较大应用价值。     

CT在急性阑尾炎诊断中的价值

为探讨CT在急性阑尾炎的诊断以及可疑阑尾炎的鉴别诊断的价值。笔者对 2 .5年内两组患者应用CT(腹部扫描 )进行诊断。A组为 50例经临床专科医师诊断为急性阑尾炎的患者 ,B组为 50例经临床专科医师诊断为可疑阑尾炎患者 ;两组病例既往均无“阑尾炎”病史。对CT诊断为急性阑尾炎的患者均行手术治疗及术后病理检查。结果示 :CT对急性阑尾炎诊断的准确率为 98.0 % ,其敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值均为 98%。异位阑尾炎的诊断率为 1 0 0 % ,阴性阑尾炎切除率为 1 .0 % ,假阴性率为 1 .1 %。在判断阑尾炎病变程度上与病理检查吻合率为 94.0 %。提示CT对诊断急性阑尾炎的诊断价值明显优于传统的诊断手段 ;CT可以定位、定性 ,CT尤适用于可疑阑尾炎的鉴别诊断 ;CT在判断阑尾病变程度上与病理检查吻合率高 ,可望降低误诊和减少漏诊率。     

血清半乳甘露聚糖联合1，3-β-D葡聚糖在侵袭性肺曲霉病诊断中的价值

目的评价血清半乳甘露聚糖（GM试验）与1,3-β-D葡聚糖（G试验）联合检测在侵袭性肺曲霉病（IPA）诊断中的价值。方法对2007年1月-2011年12月浙江省金华市中心医院呼吸科疑为IPA的136例患者进行血清G试验和GM试验。采用,检验比较单项试验和联合试验的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值。应用受试者工作特征曲线下面积（AUC）判断单项试验和联合试验的诊断效力。结果G试验单项检测的敏感性和特异性为84．0％和80．9％,GM试验为78．0％和88．2％,二者联合检测（并联＋串联）可将诊断IPA的敏感性和特异性分别提高至92．0％和92．6％。联合检测诊断IPA的AUC为0．923,95％可信区间为0．867—0．980。结论血清GM试验与G试验联合检测可显著提高IPA的诊断效力。     

阑尾疾患的诊治现状

阑尾疾患中以急性阑尾炎最为常见，迄今仍占外科住院患者的10％～15％。阑尾肿瘤虽不多见，仅占消化道恶性肿瘤的0．5％，但却有其特殊性。今就这两种病变简介其诊治现状。阑尾炎的诊治经验已逾百年，百年来的技术进步已使阑尾炎的死亡率从26％降至0．08％；但阑尾穿孔率（APR）与正常阑尾切除率（NAR）却始终维持在20％～30％，成为困扰外科医师的两大难题。围绕这两个问题形成的概念是：为降低APR，必须鼓励对疑有急性阑尾炎的患者作早期手术，即使NAR较高也在所不惜，是为降低APR必须付出的代价。公认NAR与APR呈反比，此消彼长…     

乳腺癌新辅助化疗后前哨淋巴结活检术的研究

目的 探讨乳腺癌病人新辅助化疗后前哨淋巴结活检的可行性。方法对2003年11月至2004年10月住院治疗中的57例Ⅱ、Ⅲ期乳腺癌病人行新辅助化疗后，临床检查腋窝淋巴结阴性行前哨淋巴结活检术（SLNB）。结果57例中检出前哨淋巴结（SLN）53例，检出率93．0％。SLN对腋窝淋巴结状况预测的敏感性为89．7％，特异性为100．0％，准确性为94．3％，阳性预测值为100．0％，阴性预测值为88．9％，假阴性率为5．7％。肿瘤对化疗反应为CR（完全缓解）、PR（部分缓解）和SD（稳定）的SLN检出率分别为100．0％、96．7％和70．0％（P〈0．01）。SLN假阴性3例均为腋窝淋巴结转移数〉4个者。结论Ⅱ、Ⅲ期乳腺癌实施新辅助化疗后。行SLNB可获得与早期乳腺癌SLNB相似的效果。     

血清游离PSA百分率在前列腺癌诊断盲区的价值评价

目的 探讨血清游离前列腺特异性抗原（prostate specific antigen，PSA）百分率在血清总PSA（totalPSA，t—PSA）介于4．0—20．0ng／mL时对前列腺癌（prostate cancer，Pca）的诊断价值。方法用化学发光法测定94例t-PSA介于4．0-20．0ng／mL的未治前列腺疾病患者血清游离PSA（free PSA，f-PSA），其中良性前列腺增生（benign prostatic hyperplasia，BPH）患者77例，Pca患者17例，并计算其f-PSA百分率（f／t-PSA）。结果 t-PSA介于4．0-20．0ng／mL时，Pca组f／t—PSA明显低于BPH组（P〈0.01）。以f／t—PSA为0．18、0．22为界值时其诊断Pca的敏感度为83．9％、94．1％，特异度为75．2％、63．7％，阳性预测值为42．5％、37．1％，阴性预测值为95．4％、98．3％。结论 t-PSA介于4．0-20．0ng／mL诊断盲区时，f／t-PSA对诊断Pca有较好的临床价值，以0．22为界值其敏感度达94．1％，阴性预测值达98．3％。     

急性阑尾炎的B型超声诊断：文献综述

急性阑尾炎是外科急腹症中的常见病,尽管其死亡率已经大大降低,但其阴性手术切除率仍在20～25％,临床诊断的准确率在67～80％;目前临床仍是根据症状、体征以及白细胞数增高进行诊断的;腹部透视及钡灌肠对少数病人的诊断虽有帮助,但缺乏特异性,阳性率也不高,而且对于急腹症患者,临床医生尽可能不用钡灌肠,以防止阑尾穿孔的发生;但对于临床表现非典型的可疑阑尾炎或回盲部包块的患者,钡灌肠检查仍是有意义的。CT仅用于对少数诊断不明确的阑尾炎或阑尾炎并发症的诊断,但不适于阑尾切除术前的常规检查;以往超声     

B型超声对急性阑尾炎的诊断价值

由于对急性阑尾炎一直以传统的方法,即根据症状、体征及血白细胞升高等非特异性方法进行诊断,仍存在一定的阴性(正常)阑尾切除率.尽管外科医生常考     

Advantages of focused helical computed tomographic scanning with rectal contrast only vs triple contrast in the diagnosis of clinically uncertain acute appendicitis: a prospective randomized study

HYPOTHESIS: Focused helical computed tomographic (CT) scanning with rectal contrast only is a superior diagnostic modality compared with the traditional triple-contrast CT scan for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. DESIGN: Prospective randomized analysis of both CT scan modalities. INTERVENTIONS: Only patients with uncertain diagnosis of acute appendicitis were entered in the study. The patients were then randomized to undergo the traditional triple-contrast CT scan or the new focused CT scan with rectal contrast only. Surgical management included operation or observation for 23 hours. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients participated in the study, including 52 in the triple-contrast group and 39 in the rectal-contrast group. The demographics of the triple-contrast vs the rectal-contrast groups were similar. The triple-contrast group had a sensitivity of 97%, specificity of 86%, positive predictive value of 90%, and negative predictive value of 93%. The rectal-contrast group had a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 100%, positive predictive value of 100%, and negative predictive value of 100%. There were 4 false-positive findings and 1 false-negative finding in the triple-contrast group compared with none in the rectal-contrast group. In the triple-contrast group, there were 13 perforated appendixes compared with 1 in the rectal-contrast group. The cost of a triple-contrast scan was 620 US dollars compared with 305 US dollars for a focused rectal-contrast scan. The negative appendectomy rate for the study was 8.0% (4 of 48 patients in the triple-contrast group vs 3 of 39 in the rectal-contrast group). CONCLUSIONS: The demographics, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were comparable in both groups. The focused rectal-contrast procedure was better tolerated by patients and demonstrated decreased morbidity, delay to diagnosis, perforation rate, and negative appendectomy rate with no missed diagnosis and decreased cost. Therefore, we believe that focused helical CT scanning with rectal contrast only is a superior diagnostic modality compared with the traditional triple-contrast CT scan for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.     

Improving the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography in suspected acute appendicitis by the combined transabdominal and transvaginal approach

Transabdominal ultrasound has a lower diagnostic yield in acute appendicitis than computed tomography (CT) scanning. The addition of transvaginal sonography in women with suspected appendicitis has shown improvement in the efficacy of diagnosis, potentially providing the option of selective CT use and reducing overall investigative cost and surgical delay. Two hundred ninety-two women who underwent combined transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound for suspected acute appendicitis were evaluated. Patients were divided into two groups; Group 1 including patients with a positive sonographic diagnosis of appendicitis who underwent operation and Group 2 including patients with a negative sonographic diagnosis. Of the 157 women in Group 1, the diagnosis of appendicitis was histologically confirmed in 144 patients with five cases having a normal appendix in whom eight other pathologies were found. Of the 135 women with negative ultrasound examinations, 14 underwent surgery in which four cases of appendicitis were found. The sensitivity of the combined approach was 97.3 per cent, the specificity 91 per cent, the positive predictive value 91.7 per cent, and the negative predictive value 97 per cent. Combined ultrasound has a high predictive value for the diagnosis of appendicitis and may assist in reduction of the use of CT scanning for diagnosis and in the negative appendectomy rate.     

Making Surgical Care Safer: A Survey on the Implementation of the Checklist by Belgian Surgeons

Approximately 15–20% of error in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis argues for new diagnostic methods. In recent years it has been proposed that Computed Tomography be used in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis with high sensitivity and specificity. In our study, the effect of Computed Tomography on the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and on negative appendectomy was investigated on patients with suspected acute appendicitis.

In the last 18 months, spiral Computed Tomography without contrast material has been used for 65 patients. The history, physical findings, laboratory results and Computed Tomography images of patients were compared and the final decision to operate was always made by an attending surgeon. The results of Computed Tomography have been correlated with the reports of pathology and operation findings. Other patients who have not been operated on have been followed up clinically. Correlating Computed Tomography results with operation findings revealed; 42 true positive, 3 false positive, 17 true negative and 3 false negative results. The sensitivity and specificity of CT have been found to be 93.3% and 85% respectively. Forty-eight out of 65 patients have been operated on for acute appendicitis and the negative appendectomy rate has been calculated as 6.25%.

As a consequence, it was thought that in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis the use of Computed Tomography could decrease the negative appendectomy rate when used together with clinical follow-up.     

Managing radiation exposure in children—reexamining the role of ultrasound in the diagnosis of appendicitis

Purpose

To assess the efficacy and accuracy of ultrasonography (US) and selective computed tomography (CT) in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children.

Methods

A retrospective review of all ultrasound evaluations for appendicitis from July 1, 2003, to June 30, 2010, was conducted at two urban pediatric centers. Beginning in 2003, a multi-disciplinary diagnostic protocol was implemented to reduce radiation exposure employing US as the initial imaging modality followed by CT for non-diagnostic US studies in patients with an equivocal clinical presentation. The imaging, operative findings, and pathology of 802 patients (365 females, 437 males, age less than 18 years) with suspected appendicitis were reviewed. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and negative appendectomy rate of the protocol were analyzed. A telephone survey was conducted of patients discharged without a diagnosis of appendicitis to evaluate the missed appendicitis rate.

Results

Of the 601 pediatric appendectomies performed, a total of 275 (46%) were diagnosed by protocol. The selective protocol had a sensitivity of 94.2%, specificity of 97.5%, positive predictive value of 95.2%, and negative predictive value of 97.0%. The negative appendectomy rate was 1.82%, and the missed appendicitis rate was 0%. No patient discharged after only ultrasound evaluation without undergoing surgery reported missed appendicitis on the survey (41.7% response rate). Protocol use increased from 6.7% to 88.3%. US was the sole imaging modality in 630 of all 802 patients (78.6%).

Conclusions

US followed by selective CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis is useful and accurate. This has important implications in the reduction of childhood radiation exposure.     

Can negative appendectomy rate be decreased by using spiral computed tomography without contrast material?

Approximately 15-20% of error in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis argues for new diagnostic methods. In recent years it has been proposed that Computed Tomography be used in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis with high sensitivity and specificity. In our study, the effect of Computed Tomography on the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and on negative appendectomy was investigated on patients with suspected acute appendicitis. In the last 18 months, spiral Computed Tomography without contrast material has been used for 65 patients. The history, physical findings, laboratory results and Computed Tomography images of patients were compared and the final decision to operate was always made by an attending surgeon. The results of Computed Tomography have been correlated with the reports of pathology and operation findings. Other patients who have not been operated on have been followed up clinically. Correlating Computed Tomography results with operation findings revealed; 42 true positive, 3 false positive, 17 true negative and 3 false negative results. The sensitivity and specificity of CT have been found to be 93.3% and 85% respectively. Forty-eight out of 65 patients have been operated on for acute appendicitis and the negative appendectomy rate has been calculated as 6.25%. As a consequence, it was thought that in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis the use of Computed Tomography could decrease the negative appendectomy rate when used together with clinical follow-up.     

Can computed tomography scan be performed effectively in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis without the added morbidity of rectal contrast?

The highest degrees of accuracy have been demonstrated for CT scans using rectal contrast in diagnosing appendicitis. However, the administration of rectal contrast is associated with patient discomfort and rarely, rectosigmoid perforation (0.04%). Additionally, the commonly accepted negative appendectomy rate is around 16 per cent. We performed a retrospective review of radiology, operative, and pathology reports of consecutive patients undergoing appendectomy or CT examination for appendicitis during 2006. CT scans were performed without rectal contrast. The accuracy of each type of inpatient CT examination and negative appendectomy rates were determined. Two hundred and thirty-eight patients underwent appendectomy. One hundred and thirty-four appendectomy patients (56%) received a preoperative CT scan. The negative appendectomy rates were 6.3 per cent overall, 8.7 per cent without CT examination and 4.5 per cent with CT (P = 0.3). Two hundred and forty-five inpatient CT scans were performed for suspected appendicitis with a sensitivity of 90 per cent, specificity of 98 per cent, accuracy of 94 per cent, positive predictive value of 98 per cent, and negative predictive value of 91 per cent. CT scanning without rectal contrast is effective for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis making rectal contrast, with its attendant morbidity, unnecessary. The previously acceptable published negative appendectomy rate is higher than that found in current surgical practice likely due to preoperative CT scanning.     

Akute Appendizitis

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common acute surgical conditions of the abdomen. Nevertheless, the indications for appendectomy are associated with a high preoperative rate of false diagnoses. Although the rate of unnecessary appendectomies is comparatively high (20–30%) it is considered acceptable because the rate of perforated appendices is 7–30%. With good availability and lack of radiation exposure, ultrasound is the slice imaging modality of first choice. The sensitivity of ultrasonic detection of appendicitis lies between 55 and 98% and the specificity between 78 and 100%. Computed tomography (CT) has a significantly higher sensitivity for detecting acute appendicitis compared to ultrasound both in infancy and adulthood but the specificity shows no significant differences. CT is, therefore, the imaging modality of choice in cases of relevant differential diagnosis that cannot be visualized adequately or inconclusively by sonography especially in obese and critically ill patients. Comparison of ultrasound and magnet resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a significant advantage for MRI regarding accuracy, sensitivity and negative predictive value. In contrast, specificity and positive predictive value showed no significant differences. Currently MRI is only an alternative imaging modality to ultrasound in cases of undetermined and inconclusive ultrasonic findings especially in childhood and pregnancy. The value of ultrasound in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis is increasing and, particularly in the hands of experienced investigators, is an important imaging modality which delivers important and decision-making findings. Nevertheless, the final decision for appendectomy depends on the findings of the physical examination.     

The role of computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis

BACKGROUND: Routine contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) has been described as an accurate diagnostic imaging modality in patients with acute appendicitis. However, most patients with acute appendicitis can be diagnosed by clinical findings and physical exam alone. The role of CECT in patients suspected of having appendicitis but with equivocal clinical exams remains ill defined. METHODS: One hundred and seven consecutive patients who were thought to have appendicitis but with equivocal clinical findings and/or physical exams were imaged by CECT over a 12-month period. Oral and intravenous contrast-enhanced, spiral abdominal and pelvic images were obtained using 7-mm cuts. CECT images were interpreted by a board-certified radiologist. Main outcome measures included CECT sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, comparing CECT with ultrasound, and determining the impact of CECT on the clinical management of this patient population. RESULTS: A group of 107 patients consisting of 44 males (41%) and 63 females (59%) with a median age of 33 years (range 13 to 89 years) were imaged with CECT to evaluate suspected appendicitis. Of the 107 CECTs performed, 11 false-positive and 3 false-negative readings were identified, resulting in a sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 85%, PPV of 75%, NPV of 95%, and an overall accuracy of 90%. Forty-three patients were imaged with ultrasound and CECT, and CECT had significantly better sensitivity and accuracy (30% versus 92% and 69% versus 88%, P<0.01). With regard to clinical management, 100% (36/36) of patients with appendicitis, and 4.2% (3/71) of patients without appendicitis underwent appendectomy. Therefore, the overall negative appendectomy rate was 7.6% (3/39). CONCLUSIONS: CECT is a useful diagnostic imaging modality for patients suspected of having acute appendicitis but with equivocal clinical findings and/or physical exams. CECT is more sensitive and accurate than ultrasound and is particularly useful in excluding the diagnosis of appendicitis in those without disease.     

The value of sonography in the diagnosis of appendicitis. A prospective study of 100 patients

Between October 1988 and July 1989 100 consecutive patients with suspected appendicitis were seen at the surgical clinic, University Hospital of Aachen. All patients underwent ultrasonographic examination corresponding to a prospective study protocol in order to determine the value of ultrasound for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. The sonographic findings were correlated with the histologic diagnosis or the clinical course, respectively. We found a sensitivity of 100% for appendiceal mass, of 88% for phlegmonous appendicitis and of 25% for catarrhal appendicitis. The overall sensitivity was 49% and the overall specificity rate was 97%. The overall accuracy rate was 64%. The predictive value of a positive test was 97% and the predictive value of a negative finding was 46%. The morphologic changes during the progress of inflammation of the appendix and their sonographic visualisation were discussed. A differentiated concept was developed to integrate the sonographic findings in the therapeutic decision.