• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

阑尾炎的诊断评分。对疑似急性阑尾炎患者的诊断评分(埃斯凯林评分)进行验证。

Diagnostic score in appendicitis. Validation of a diagnostic score (Eskelinen score) in patients in whom acute appendicitis is suspected.

作者信息

Sitter H, Hoffmann S, Hassan I, Zielke A

机构信息

Institute of Theoretical Surgery, Philipps University of Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, 35033 Marburg, Germany.

出版信息

Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2004 Jun;389(3):213-8. doi: 10.1007/s00423-003-0436-9. Epub 2003 Nov 18.

DOI:10.1007/s00423-003-0436-9
PMID:14624293
Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM

At times, the diagnosis of acute appendicitis may be difficult. However, for minimum morbidity to be obtained, early and accurate diagnosis is essential. This study aimed to validate a scoring system proposed by Eskelinen et al. as an aid in making the diagnosis of appendicitis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The prospectively documented data of a consecutive series of 2,359 patients admitted for suspicion of appendicitis were used for validation. Accuracy and positive predictive value were defined as the main overall performance parameters, as was the rate of unnecessary operations to assess changes of patient management. Overall performance was assessed by receiver-operator characteristics (ROC) analysis.

RESULTS

Of 2,359 patients, 662 were proven to have acute appendicitis (prevalence of 28%). The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and accuracy of the score were 0.79, 0.85, 0.68, 0.91 and 0.835 at a cut-off value of 55. Calibration of the score's cut-off value to 57 yielded more favourable results (0.72, 0.91, 0.76, 0.9 and 0.86), and the rate of unnecessary operations declined from 26.6% to 15.4% ( P<0.05, chi2). ROC analysis revealed an area index of 0.91.

CONCLUSION

The Eskelinen score delivered acceptable clinical results only after calibration to a cut-off value of 57. The data from this study suggest the investigation of whether a calibrated score might be particularly instrumental in the pre-admission evaluation of the patient in whom appendicitis is suspected.

摘要

背景与目的

有时,急性阑尾炎的诊断可能存在困难。然而,为了将发病率降至最低,早期准确诊断至关重要。本研究旨在验证Eskelinen等人提出的一种评分系统,以辅助阑尾炎的诊断。

患者与方法

前瞻性记录的连续2359例因疑似阑尾炎入院患者的数据用于验证。准确性和阳性预测值被定义为主要的总体性能参数,不必要手术率用于评估患者管理的变化。通过受试者操作特征(ROC)分析评估总体性能。

结果

2359例患者中,662例被证实患有急性阑尾炎(患病率为28%)。在临界值为55时,该评分的总体敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值以及准确性分别为0.79、0.85、0.68、0.91和0.835。将评分的临界值校准为57产生了更有利的结果(0.72、0.91、0.76、0.9和0.86),不必要手术率从26.6%降至15.4%(P<0.05,卡方检验)。ROC分析显示面积指数为0.91。

结论

Eskelinen评分仅在校准至临界值57后才产生可接受的临床结果。本研究数据表明,对于疑似阑尾炎患者,校准后的评分在入院前评估中是否特别有用值得研究。

相似文献

1
Diagnostic score in appendicitis. Validation of a diagnostic score (Eskelinen score) in patients in whom acute appendicitis is suspected.阑尾炎的诊断评分。对疑似急性阑尾炎患者的诊断评分(埃斯凯林评分)进行验证。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2004 Jun;389(3):213-8. doi: 10.1007/s00423-003-0436-9. Epub 2003 Nov 18.
2
Comparison of clinical judgment and diagnostic ultrasonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: experience with a score-aided diagnosis.临床判断与诊断性超声检查在急性阑尾炎诊断中的比较:评分辅助诊断经验
Eur J Surg. 1997 Jun;163(6):433-43.
3
[Validation of a diagnostic scoring system (Ohmann score) in acute appendicitis].[急性阑尾炎诊断评分系统(奥曼评分)的验证]
Chirurg. 1999 Jul;70(7):777-83; discussion 784. doi: 10.1007/s001040050721.
4
[Can diagnostic scoring systems help decision making in primary care of patients with suspected acute appendicitis?].[诊断评分系统能否有助于疑似急性阑尾炎患者的基层医疗决策?]
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1999 May 7;124(18):545-50. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1024357.
5
Prospective validation of the pediatric appendicitis score in a Canadian pediatric emergency department.加拿大儿科急诊科小儿阑尾炎评分的前瞻性验证
Acad Emerg Med. 2009 Jul;16(7):591-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00445.x. Epub 2009 Jun 22.
6
Clinical decision-making, ultrasonography, and scores for evaluation of suspected acute appendicitis.疑似急性阑尾炎评估中的临床决策、超声检查及评分
World J Surg. 2001 May;25(5):578-84. doi: 10.1007/s002680020078.
7
The evaluation of the validity of Alvarado, Eskelinen, Lintula and Ohmann scoring systems in diagnosing acute appendicitis in children.阿尔瓦拉多、埃斯凯林恩、林图拉和奥曼评分系统在诊断儿童急性阑尾炎中的有效性评估。
Pediatr Surg Int. 2014 Mar;30(3):317-21. doi: 10.1007/s00383-014-3467-0.
8
Accuracy of Modified Alvarado Score, Eskelinen Score and Ohmann Score in Diagnosing Acute Appendicitis.改良阿瓦拉多评分、埃斯凯林评分及奥曼评分在诊断急性阑尾炎中的准确性
Psychiatr Danub. 2017 May;29(Suppl 2):134-141.
9
Evaluation of scoring systems in predicting acute appendicitis in children.评估评分系统在预测儿童急性阑尾炎中的作用。
Surgery. 2016 Dec;160(6):1599-1604. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.06.023. Epub 2016 Aug 12.
10
Analysis of scores in diagnosis of acute appendicitis in women.女性急性阑尾炎诊断评分分析
Coll Antropol. 2005 Jun;29(1):133-8.

引用本文的文献

1
Diagnostic Accuracy Rates of Appendicitis Scoring Systems for the Stratified Age Groups.不同年龄分层组阑尾炎评分系统的诊断准确率
Emerg Med Int. 2022 Oct 31;2022:2505977. doi: 10.1155/2022/2505977. eCollection 2022.
2
Gender-specific Performance of a Diagnostic Score in Acute Appendicitis.诊断评分在急性阑尾炎中的性别特异性表现。
In Vivo. 2020 Nov-Dec;34(6):3687-3703. doi: 10.21873/invivo.12217.
3
Leucocyte Count Does Not Improve the Diagnostic Performance of a Diagnostic Score (DS) in Distinguishing Acute Appendicitis (AA) from Nonspecific Abdominal Pain (NSAP).

本文引用的文献

1
Appendicitis. A critical review of diagnosis and treatment in 1,000 cases.阑尾炎。对1000例病例的诊断与治疗的批判性综述。
Arch Surg. 1975 May;110(5):677-84. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1975.01360110223039.
2
Influence of ultrasound on clinical decision making in acute appendicitis: a prospective study.超声对急性阑尾炎临床决策的影响:一项前瞻性研究。
Eur J Surg. 1998 Mar;164(3):201-9. doi: 10.1080/110241598750004652.
3
"Surgical" ultrasound in suspected acute appendicitis.疑似急性阑尾炎的“外科”超声检查
白细胞计数不能提高诊断评分(DS)鉴别急性阑尾炎(AA)与非特异性腹痛(NSAP)的诊断性能。
In Vivo. 2020 Nov-Dec;34(6):3327-3339. doi: 10.21873/invivo.12171.
4
Which appendicitis scoring system is most suitable for pregnant patients? A comparison of nine different systems.哪种阑尾炎评分系统最适合孕妇?九种不同系统的比较。
World J Emerg Surg. 2020 May 18;15(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s13017-020-00310-7.
5
Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of a decision tree model in suspected acute appendicitis with equivocal preoperative computed tomography findings compared with Alvarado, Eskelinen, and adult appendicitis scores: A STARD compliant article.与阿尔瓦拉多、埃斯凯林和成人阑尾炎评分相比,决策树模型对术前计算机断层扫描结果不明确的疑似急性阑尾炎的诊断性能评估:一篇符合STARD标准的文章。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Oct;98(40):e17368. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000017368.
6
Clinical Importance of the Heel Drop Test and a New Clinical Score for Adult Appendicitis.足跟下落试验对成人阑尾炎的临床重要性及一种新的临床评分
PLoS One. 2016 Oct 10;11(10):e0164574. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164574. eCollection 2016.
7
Validation of the diagnostic score for acute lower abdominal pain in women of reproductive age.育龄期女性急性下腹痛诊断评分的验证
Emerg Med Int. 2014;2014:320926. doi: 10.1155/2014/320926. Epub 2014 May 25.
8
The evaluation of the validity of Alvarado, Eskelinen, Lintula and Ohmann scoring systems in diagnosing acute appendicitis in children.阿尔瓦拉多、埃斯凯林恩、林图拉和奥曼评分系统在诊断儿童急性阑尾炎中的有效性评估。
Pediatr Surg Int. 2014 Mar;30(3):317-21. doi: 10.1007/s00383-014-3467-0.
9
Alvarado, Eskelinen, Ohhmann and Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis scores for diagnosis of acute appendicitis.阿尔瓦拉多、埃斯凯林恩、奥夫曼和 Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha 用于诊断急性阑尾炎的评分。
World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Dec 21;19(47):9057-62. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i47.9057.
10
Diagnostic score in acute appendicitis. Validation of a diagnostic score (Lintula score) for adults with suspected appendicitis.急性阑尾炎诊断评分。一种用于诊断疑似阑尾炎的成年人的诊断评分(Lintula 评分)的验证。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2010 Jun;395(5):495-500. doi: 10.1007/s00423-010-0627-0. Epub 2010 Apr 9.
Surg Endosc. 1997 Apr;11(4):362-5. doi: 10.1007/s004649900364.
4
Acute appendicitis--ways to improve diagnostic accuracy.
Eur J Surg. 1996 Jun;162(6):435-42.
5
[Clinical standardization in acute abdominal pain].[急性腹痛的临床标准化]
Langenbecks Arch Chir. 1996;381(2):65-74. doi: 10.1007/BF00183935.
6
[Diagnostic score for acute appendicitis].[急性阑尾炎的诊断评分]
Chirurg. 1995 Feb;66(2):135-41.
7
Diagnostic scores for acute appendicitis. Abdominal Pain Study Group.急性阑尾炎的诊断评分。腹痛研究组。
Eur J Surg. 1995 Apr;161(4):273-81.
8
Acute appendicitis. Prospective trial concerning diagnostic accuracy and complications.
Am J Surg. 1981 Feb;141(2):232-4. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(81)90164-1.
9
Acute appendicitis: a clinical study of 1018 cases of emergency appendectomy.急性阑尾炎:1018例急诊阑尾切除术的临床研究
Acta Chir Scand. 1982;148(1):51-62.
10
Geographical variation in disease presentation. Does it constitute a problem and can information science help?
Med Decis Making. 1981;1(1):59-69. doi: 10.1177/0272989X8100100108.