The gas-containing appendix: potential sonographic pitfall in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

The presence of gas within the appendix on plain abdominal radiographs is nonspecific and may or may not be associated with acute appendicitis. This finding, however, has not previously been reported with graded compression sonography of the right lower quadrant. Gas within the appendix was identified in four of 154 patients with a visualized appendix. All four patients had surgically confirmed acute appendicitis. Diagnostic difficulties were encountered in three of these four patients. In two patients, the findings were misinterpreted as an extraluminal gas-forming periappendiceal abscess. In an additional patient, the gas-filled appendix was initially mistaken for a segment of normal terminal ileum. The gas-filled appendix is a potential pitfall in the sonographic diagnosis of acute appendicitis. However, if other diagnostic criteria are met, gas within the appendix should not preclude establishing a sonographic diagnosis of appendicitis.     

Graded compression sonography of abdominal neoplasms mimicking acute appendicitis

Over a 3-year period nine patients (mean age of 43 years) with acute abdominal pain and unsuspected abdominal neoplasms were referred for graded compression sonography to rule out appendicitis. Six of the nine patients had right lower quadrant neoplasms involving the cecum, terminal ileum, iliacus muscle, or iliac lymph nodes. However, in three patients neoplasm was noted outside the right iliac fossa involving the liver, right kidney, and upper abdominal mesentery. This study underscores the fact that in patients without sonographic evidence of acute appendicitis, a survey of the upper abdomen and right flank should routinely be performed in addition to scanning the right iliac fossa and pelvis. In patients more than 50 years of age neoplasm must also be kept in mind in the differential diagnosis of appendicitis.     

Diagnostic accuracy of laboratory and ultrasound findings in patients with a non-visualized appendix

Ultrasound (US) and laboratory testing are initial diagnostic tests for acute appendicitis. A diagnostic dilemma develops when the appendix is not visualized on US. Objective: To determine if specific US findings and/or laboratory results predict acute appendicitis when the appendix is not visualized. Methods: A prospective study was conducted on children (birth-18?yrs) presenting to the pediatric emergency department with suspected acute appendicitis who underwent right lower quadrant US.Children with previous appendectomy, US at another facility, or eloped were excluded. US findings analyzed: inflammatory changes, right lower quadrant and lower abdominal fluid, tenderness during US exam and lymph nodes. Diagnoses were confirmed via surgical pathology. Results 1252 subjects were enrolled, 60.8% (762) had appendix visualized and 39.1% (490) did not. In children where the appendix was not seen, 6.7% [33] were diagnosed with appendicitis. Among patients with a non-visualized appendix, the likelihood of appendicitis was significantly greater if: inflammatory changes in the RLQ (OR 18.0, 95% CI 4.5–72.1), CRP >0.5?mg/dL (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.0–6.8), or WBC?>?10 (OR 4.36, 95% CI 1.66–11.58). Duration of abdominal pain >3?days was significantly less likely associated with appendicitis in this model (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.003–0.395). Combined, the absence inflammatory changes, CRP?<?0.5?mg/dL, WBC?<?10, and pain, ≤3?days had a NPV of 94.0%. Conclusion When the appendix is not visualized on US, predictors for appendicitis include the presence of inflammatory changes in the RLQ, an elevated WBC/CRP and abdominal pain <3?days.     

Imaging of acute appendicitis in children

Acute appendicitis is the most common acute abdominal condition that results in surgical intervention in childhood. The clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children can be challenging. Approximately one-third of children with the condition have atypical clinical findings and are initially managed nonoperatively. Complications associated with delayed diagnosis of this condition include perforation, abscess formation, peritonitis, sepsis, bowel obstruction, infertility, and death. The use of cross sectional imaging has proven useful for the evaluation of suspected acute appendicitis in children. Both graded compression sonography and CT have been widely utilized in the imaging assessment of the condition. The principal advantages of sonography are its lower cost, lack of ionizing radiation, and ability to assess ovarian pathology that can often mimic acute appendicitis in female patients. The principal advantages of CT include less operator dependency than sonography as reflected by a higher diagnostic accuracy, and enhanced delineation of disease extent in perforated appendicitis.     

Sonography of acute appendicitis in childhood: perforation versus nonperforation.

We evaluated the sonographic findings in 133 consecutive children referred for suspected appendicitis. Fifty-eight of these patients (44%) ultimately underwent surgery, with 54 of these proved to have acute appendicitis. Thirty-one (58%) of the 54 had nonperforated appendicitis, and 23 (43%) had evidence of perforation. Previously described sonographic findings that have been employed in the diagnosis of appendicitis were evaluated, with the presence or absence of these findings being compared in patients with non-perforated and perforated appendicitis. In those patients who did not undergo surgery, the following findings were documented and compared to the findings in patients with proved appendicitis: (1) an identifiable appendix and its sonographic characteristics, (2) fluid localized to the right peritoneal reflection or periappendiceal region, or both, (3) free pelvic fluid, and (4) right lower quadrant adenopathy. Our results suggest that high-resolution, real-time sonography, using graded compression, is very sensitive in the identification of acute nonperforated appendicitis. Perforated appendicitis, however, can be a more difficult diagnosis because the appendix frequently decompresses with perforation and yet may not "wall off" or form a well-defined abscess. As a result, the appendix can be very difficult to identify.     

Acute appendicitis mimicking infectious enteritis: diagnostic value of sonography.

OBJECTIVE: To verify the role of sonography in screening of acute appendicitis in patients admitted to an infectious disease unit for suspected acute infectious enteritis. METHODS: One hundred eighty consecutive patients (102 male and 78 female; age range, 5-72 years; mean age, 31 years) admitted for suspected infectious enteritis or typhoid fever were prospectively studied with abdominal sonography within 48 hours after admission. None of the patients had peritoneal irritation. Forty-six patients (25%) had white blood cell counts of more than 10,000/mm3 (range, 10,300-18,000/mm3). The diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made when a detectable appendix with an anteroposterior diameter of greater than 7 mm could be seen on sonography. RESULTS: Eleven (6%) of 180 patients had thickened appendixes (anteroposterior diameter range, 7-14 mm); 2 of them had periappendiceal abscesses. Four (36%) of 11 patients with acute appendicitis had high white blood cell counts. All sonographic diagnoses of acute appendicitis and periappendiceal abscesses were confirmed at surgery. Sonography ruled out acute appendicitis in 169 patients. In all of them, clinical and sonographic follow-up excluded the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Normal appendixes were shown on sonography in 38 (22%) of 169 cases and were not detectable in 131 (78%) of 169. CONCLUSIONS: Sonography of the appendix is a useful method for early assessment of acute appendicitis in patients thought to have enteritis or typhoid fever.     

Saline-filled appendiceal ultrasonography in clinically equivocalacute appendicitis

Background: To establish the value of saline-filled appendiceal ultrasonography in the the diagnosis of clinically equivocal acute appendicitis. Methods: Saline-filled ultrasonography was performed in 43 patients with an equivocal clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Results: Sonography diagnosed 31 of 32 patients without acute appendicitis (97%). A normal appendix was visualized in 15 patients (47%), and we identified a normal appendix in 15 of 22 patients (68%) in whom the colon was cleansed with Golytely?. Sonography diagnosed 10 of 11 patients with acute appendicitis (91%). In three of 10 patients, the findings corresponded to sonographic pitfalls. Conclusion: Saline-filled appendiceal ultrasonography enables the detection of a normal appendix and may overcome sonographic pitfalls in acute appendicitis. Received: 2 June 1995/Accepted: 18 July 1995     

Sonography of acute appendicitis: a critical review

In 20% of the cases of acute appendicitis, especially in children, the elderly, and ovulating women, the findings are atypical. The radiographic procedures used to aid in the diagnosis have not been proven reliable. Sonography has often been used to diagnose or rule out appendiceal abscesses, or diseases that can mimic acute appendicitis, such as gynecologic, obstetric, or biliary abnormalities. Recently, high-resolution sonography with graded compression has been shown to be very helpful in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in several studies. High-resolution 5- to 7.5-MHz transducers are used to compress the bowels, displace the interfering gas in the right lower quadrant, and directly visualize the inflamed appendix with a sensitivity that varies from 80 to 95%, a specificity of 95 to 100%, and an accuracy of 91 to 95%. It is also possible to differentiate acute appendicitis from the gangrenous and perforated appendix. High-resolution sonography is currently the diagnostic method of choice for appendicitis, particularly in patients with equivocal clinical findings. The technique, normal and pathologic anatomy values, and limitations of sonography are discussed.     

Appendicitis masquerading as tumor: a case of two diagnoses

Acute appendicitis remains one of the most difficult diagnoses to make in the Emergency Department. We present a puzzling and unusual case. A 47-year-old man had several hours of acute abdominal pain in the right upper quadrant, point tenderness in the right midquadrant on examination, and normal chemistries. Early appendicitis was suspected and a computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen was obtained. Appendicitis was not seen. What was evident was a retroperitoneal lipoma estimated to weigh 10 pounds. The general surgeon was consulted who believed that operation was necessary in light of the patient’s continuing abdominal pain and the presence of the mass. Masses this large could cause pain from local compression of structures, or ischemia of the mass from outgrowing its blood supply. In surgery, a lipoma was observed that filled most of the retroperitoneum and displaced all the contents of the abdomen, including the cecum and its appendix. Also present was an acute appendicitis. On retrospective analysis of the CT scan, the appendicitis was evident but atypically located in the epigastrium. This case illustrates once again that the CT scan is a useful diagnostic adjunct for the diagnosis of new onset abdominal pain and specifically for appendicitis.     

Ultrasonography in suspected acute appendicitis in childhood—report of 1285 cases

Objective: For the assessment of the diagnostic value of real-time ultrasonography (US) in children with suspected acute appendicitis (a.A.) the results of graded compression US are compared with clinical and histological final diagnoses. Methods: In a prospective study over nearly 9 years we examined 1285 children aged 1–15 years (m=514, f=771). Using a 5-MHz curved array transducer the right lower quadrant was examined in a graded compression technique. Results: Prevalence of histologically proven a.A. was remarkably low (9%). In diagnosis of acute appendicitis in childhood US achieves a sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 98%, a positive predictive value of 90% and a negative predictive value of 98%. The overall accuracy was 98%. Mesenteric lymphadenitis was seen in 181 cases (prevalence 12%) and terminal ileitis occasionally accompanied by mesenteric lymphadenitis was seen in 116 cases (prevalence 9%). Conclusion: In children with suspected appendicitis US of the abdomen gives great diagnostical value for differential diagnosis of a.A. and other more frequent inflammatory diseases of the ileocoecal region. Thus US provides further reliable information to the referring physician. Consequently it is necessary to perform US in each child with acute abdominal pain, even if clinical diagnosis seems to be well established.     

Sonography of acute appendicitis in pregnancy

Background: Clinical evaluation of acute appendicitis is difficult in pregnant patients. Delay in diagnosis is associated with increased fetal mortality. The purpose of our study was to assess the value of sonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant women. Methods: We obtained sonograms in 22 pregnant women suspected of acute appendicitis. All sonograms were performed using graded-compression to detect an enlarged appendix. The sonographic criteria for acute appendicitis were detection of a noncompressible blindended and tubular multilayered structure of maximal diameter greater than 6 mm. Results: The sonographic findings were correlated with surgical findings in seven cases and clinical follow-up in 15 cases. Acute appendicitis was diagnosed by sonography in three of 22 patients, and in all but one was confirmed by surgical and pathologic findings. In the remaining 19 patients, 15 improved on clinical follow-up; three were shown to have a normal appendix at surgery and one had focal acute inflammation at the tip of the appendix. Conclusions: Our experience suggests that graded-compression sonography is a useful procedure in pregnant patients suspected of acute appendicitis and has a similar accuracy as in nonpregnant women, especially in the first and second trimester.     

腹部加压联合阴道超声在妇科急腹症与阑尾炎诊断及鉴别诊断临床价值

目的 探讨腹部高低频探头逐步加压联合阴道超声对妇科急腹症与阑尾炎诊断及鉴别诊断的临床价值。方法 用腹部高低频探头逐步加压并与阴道超声联合应用于189例已婚女性下腹痛患者，对下腹部及盆腔进行扫查。结果 阑尾炎术前诊断符合率100%;卵巢肿物扭转及盆腔炎诊断符合率94.1%;黄体破裂及宫外孕诊断符合率分别为88.9%及89.7%;子宫内膜异位囊肿破裂80%。结论 腹部高低频加压超声联合阴道超声利于妇科急腹症与阑尾炎的诊断及鉴别诊断，减少漏误诊。     

Appendicitis in double cecal appendix: Case report

Double cecal appendix is a rare anatomical variation. Approximately 100 cases have been reported worldwide. It is usually diagnosed incidentally during emergency appendectomies due to inflammatory processes in the cecal appendix. Case presentation: male, white, 36 years old, obese, presenting with pain in the lower abdomen for 24 h followed by nausea, vomiting and mild fever. He was subjected to additional tests, with the leukogram showing leukocytosis and abdominal ultrasonography depicting cecal appendix with thickened wall, locally associated with small quantities of liquid and intestinal loop obstruction. He underwent laparotomy, revealing acute appendicitis. Another intestinal loop obstruction was identified next to the ileum, leading to recognizing another cecal appendix after local dissection. Double appendectomy and segmental iliectomy were performed although not needed. Results of the anatomopathological examination of the surgical samples showed acute inflammation in the two cecal appendices. So, performing a routine retroperitoneal release and a complete cecum evaluation during such surgical procedures is recommended and suggested due to the possibility of not identifying a second cecal appendix.     

Appendiceal intussusception diagnosed with endoscopic sonography

Intussusception of the appendix vermiformis is an uncommon cause of abdominal pain. Several imaging modalities are of limited value in diagnosing this rare condition, including barium enema, transabdominal sonography, and CT. We report a case of intussusception of the appendix vermiformis with the clinical presentation of intermittent abdominal pain in the right lower quadrant. Colonoscopy revealed an erythematous polypoid lesion at the cecal base. Endoscopic sonography demonstrated a multiconcentric structure and enabled the tentative diagnosis of intussusception of the appendix vermiformis. Laparoscopic surgery with a reduction of the appendix and appendectomy was performed and confirmed the diagnosis.     

It is not always appendicitis

BACKGROUND: Patients who are suspected of having acute appendicitis usually undergo surgery in order to avoid life-threatening complications such as perforation and peritonitis. However, acute appendicitis is difficult to distinguish from other sources of right-sided abdominal pain. The clinical picture is almost indistinguishable from appendiceal diverticulitis, which is a rare entity and remains a difficult diagnostic problem. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We describe the case of a 39-year-old male with perforated appendiceal diverticulitis. The patient was admitted to our surgical unit with acute appendicitis-like symptoms and underwent surgery with a diagnosis of suspected acute appendicitis. RESULTS: The patient was found to have perforated appendiceal diverticulitis and standard appendectomy with abdominal lavage was carried out. DISCUSSION: Most patients presenting with acute right-sided peritonitic pain are diagnosed and managed as cases of acute appendicitis. Acute pain in the lower right side of the abdomen caused by appendiceal diverticulitis is very rare and clinically indistinguishable from acute appendicitis. Inflammatory complications of appendiceal diverticula mimic acute appendicitis. CONCLUSION: Every surgeon should be aware of the possibility of diverticulitis of the appendix in the operating room, even if this does not change the operative management. As diverticula of the cecum can be found as solitary lesions, as multiple lesions confined to the right colon, or as part of a generalized disease of the entire colon, postoperative barium enema examination may be useful.     

Transvaginal sonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate transvaginal sonography with power Doppler capacity in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and in discriminating appendicitis from pelvic inflammatory disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We describe transvaginal sonographic findings of six women with acute appendicitis selected from 31 women seen in an emergency room setting for clinically suspected pelvic inflammatory disease. The study population underwent gray-scale transvaginal sonography, and specific sonographic landmark findings for acute appendicitis and pelvic inflammatory disease were used. Hyperemia of any infectious complex was identified by power Doppler. Laparoscopy was performed after transvaginal sonography and was used as the gold standard. RESULTS: Laparoscopy showed acute appendicitis in six (19%) of the 31 patients. A thick walled non-compressible gas-containing tubular structure with a diameter exceeding 6 mm was seen by transvaginal sonography in four of the six cases, consistent with uncomplicated appendicitis. A heterogeneous complex with surrounding hyperechogenic soft tissue was seen in two cases with gangrenous appendicitis. Power Doppler detected hyperemia in all six cases. Normal adnexal structures were imaged next to the inflamed appendix. The sonographic criteria consistent with acute appendicitis were clearly different from those of acute pelvic inflammatory disease. CONCLUSIONS: Transvaginal sonography provides an opportunity to distinguish between appendicitis and acute pelvic inflammatory disease. Prospective trials are needed in order to evaluate the impact of transvaginal sonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.     

低辐射有限范围CT扫描技术在未成年人急性阑尾炎中的应用价值

目的:探讨缩小扫描范围,减少辐射剂量在未成年人急性阑尾炎(MAA)诊断中的应用价值。方法:选取我院因疑似急性阑尾炎而行CT检查的例未成年患者80例,分别回顾全扫描(膈顶至耻骨联合下缘)和模拟有限范围扫描(L2椎体上缘至耻骨联合上缘)的CT影像,评估两者在阑尾的可视化、急性阑尾炎(AA)、替代诊断以及偶然发现上的差异。测定全扫描与有限范围扫描的全身有效剂量,进行配对t检验,判断两者有无统计学意义。结果:所有患者阑尾均在有限范围扫描中可见,与全扫描对照,有限范围扫没有遗漏一例AA,但却漏诊了二例替代诊断非结石性胆囊炎。全扫描全身有效平均剂量为5.45mSV,有限范围扫描平均有效剂量为3.1mSv,剂量减少了43.1%(P<0.001)。结论:对临床疑似MAA的患者,从L2椎体上缘扫描至耻骨联合上缘的有限范围扫描与全扫描一样准确,具有扫描范围小,辐射剂量低的优点,值得临床推广应用。     

Comparison between technetium 99m hexamethylpropyleneamine oxide labeled white blood cell abdominal scan and abdominal sonography to detect appendicitis in adult patients with atypical clinical presentation

BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis is much more serious in the elderly, and early diagnosis is very important. However, the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in older patients is often difficult because these patients may present with atypical clinical manifestations. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study to evaluate and compare the value of technetium 99m hexamethylpropyleneamine oxide (Tc 99m HMPAO) labeled white blood cell (WBC) abdominal scan and abdominal sonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in older patients with an atypical clinical presentation. Forty-nine patients (age > 50 years) with acute abdominal pain and suspected appendicitis, but with atypical findings, were included in this study. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients received laparotomy for final surgical and pathologic diagnoses. The remaining 22 patients did not receive surgery and showed no evidence of appendicitis after at least 1 month of follow-up. Two patients had false-positive WBC scan findings and two patients had false-negative WBC scan findings. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for WBC scans in diagnosing appendicitis were 92.0%, 91.7%, and 91.8%, respectively. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for abdominal sonography in diagnosing appendicitis were 84.0%, 95.8%, and 89.8%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The Tc 99m HMPAO WBC scan provides a more sensitive and accurate method for diagnosing appendicitis in older patients with equivocal clinical examinations when compared with abdominal sonography.     

Sonography in the Evaluation of Acute Appendicitis

Objective. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the negative predictive value (NPV) of sonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Methods. Right lower quadrant sonograms of 193 patients (158 female and 35 male; age range, 3–20 years) with suspected acute appendicitis over a 1‐year period were retrospectively reviewed. Sonographic findings were graded on a 5‐point scale, ranging from a normal appendix identified (grade 1) to frankly acute appendicitis (grade 5). Sonographic findings were compared with subsequent computed tomographic (CT), surgical, and pathologic findings. The diagnostic accuracy of sonography was assessed considering surgical findings and clinical follow‐up as reference standards. Results. Forty‐nine patients (25.4%) had appendicitis on sonography, and 144 (74.6%) had negative sonographic findings. Computed tomographic scans were obtained in 51 patients (26.4%) within 4 days after sonography. These included 39 patients with negative and 12 with positive sonographic findings. Computed tomography changed the sonographic diagnosis in 10 patients: from negative to positive in 3 cases and positive to negative in 7. Forty‐three patients (22.2%) underwent surgery. The surgical findings were positive for appendicitis in 37 (86%) of the 43 patients who had surgery. Patients with negative sonographic findings who, to our knowledge, did not have subsequent CT scans or surgery were considered to have negative findings for appendicitis. Seven patients with negative sonographic findings underwent surgery and had appendicitis; therefore, 137 of 144 patients with negative sonographic findings did not have appendicitis. On the basis of these numbers, the NPV was 95.1%. Conclusions. Sonography has a high NPV and should be considered as a reasonable screening tool in the evaluation of acute appendicitis. Further imaging could be performed if clinical signs and symptoms worsen.     

Anatomic basis for delayed diagnosis of appendicitis

Gangrene or perforation of the appendix is often caused by failure to make an early diagnosis of appendicitis. Variability in the anatomic location of the appendix can be responsible for atypical manifestations of appendicitis and diagnostic errors. Over a 52-month period, 125 appendectomies were done for suspected appendicitis at a military hospital. After excluding cases in which the location of the appendix was not provided, 106 cases were available for review. Fifteen patients (14%) did not have appendicitis. The appendix was found in the true pelvis, was behind the ileum or ileocolic mesentery, or was both retrocolic and retroperitoneal in 11 of 16 patients (69%) with gangrenous or perforative appendicitis. In contrast, the appendix was in one of these three sites in only four of 75 patients (5%) with simple appendicitis (P less than .001). Both physicians and patients were responsible for diagnostic delays, but the paucity of symptoms and signs in patients with a "hidden" appendix was the most likely cause of failure to diagnose appendicitis before perforation.