• 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

如何避免阴性阑尾切除术:超声检查能做到这一点吗?

How to avoid negative appendectomies: Can US achieve this?

作者信息

Kartal Kinyas, Yazıcı Pınar, Ünlü Taner Mehmet, Uludağ Mehmet, Mihmanlı Mehmet

机构信息

Department of General Surgery, Şişli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul-Turkey.

出版信息

Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2017 Mar;23(2):134-138. doi: 10.5505/tjtes.2016.79328.

DOI:10.5505/tjtes.2016.79328
PMID:28467580
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis is based primarily on symptoms and physical findings. However, diagnosis of appendicitis is not always straightforward. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the diagnostic effectiveness of ultrasonography (US) in these cases in combination with white blood cell count (WBC) and C-reactive protein (CRP) level.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of data collected on 470 consecutive patients who underwent appendectomy at the same institution between January 2014 and January 2016 was conducted. Data included demographic features, preoperative WBC and CRP levels, and US measurement of diameter of appendix. Patients were divided into 3 groups: lymphoid hyperplasia (LH), non-complicated acute appendicitis (NCAA), and complicated acute appendicitis (CAA), according to postoperative histopathological examination results.

RESULTS

There were 331 male and 139 female patients with mean age of 32.29±11.44 years included in the study. Mean WBC level was 12.31103/µL (±4.47 103/µL), 13.3 103/µL (±3.87 103/µL) and 14.08 103/µL (±4.11 103/µL) in LH, NCAA, and CAA groups, respectively (p=0.016). Mean CRP level was 14.2±19 mg/L, 36.9±59 mg/L, and 40.8±66 mg/L in LH, NCAA, and CAA groups, respectively (p=0.008). Mean outer diameter of the vermiform appendix on US was 4.8 mm (±3.9 mm), 6.9 mm (±4.08 mm) and 7.6 mm (±3.92 mm) in LH, NCAA, and CAA groups, respectively (p<0.01). When all variables were compared with each other, there were statistically significant differences in US findings according to group.

CONCLUSION

WBC count and CRP level were higher in patients with acute appendicitis, but these findings alone were insufficient for definitive diagnosis. US findings were effectual both in diagnosis and demonstration of severe inflammation. US should be combined with laboratory tests and used as standard initial imaging in diagnostic pathway of patients with clinically suspected appendicitis. The authors of this study believe that this diagnostic pathway will reduce negative appendectomy rate.

摘要

背景

急性阑尾炎的临床诊断主要基于症状和体格检查结果。然而,阑尾炎的诊断并非总是一目了然。本研究的目的是证明超声检查(US)联合白细胞计数(WBC)和C反应蛋白(CRP)水平在这些病例中的诊断有效性。

方法

对2014年1月至2016年1月在同一机构接受阑尾切除术的470例连续患者收集的数据进行回顾性分析。数据包括人口统计学特征、术前WBC和CRP水平以及阑尾直径的超声测量值。根据术后组织病理学检查结果,将患者分为3组:淋巴组织增生(LH)、非复杂性急性阑尾炎(NCAA)和复杂性急性阑尾炎(CAA)。

结果

本研究纳入331例男性和139例女性患者,平均年龄为32.29±11.44岁。LH组、NCAA组和CAA组的平均WBC水平分别为12.3×10³/µL(±4.47×10³/µL)、13.3×10³/µL(±3.87×10³/µL)和14.08×10³/µL(±4.11×10³/µL)(p = 0.016)。LH组、NCAA组和CAA组的平均CRP水平分别为14.2±19mg/L、36.9±59mg/L和40.8±66mg/L(p = 0.008)。LH组、NCAA组和CAA组超声检查显示的阑尾平均外径分别为4.8mm(±3.9mm)、6.9mm(±4.08mm)和7.6mm(±3.92mm)(p<0.01)。当所有变量相互比较时,根据分组不同,超声检查结果存在统计学显著差异。

结论

急性阑尾炎患者的WBC计数和CRP水平较高,但仅凭这些结果不足以做出明确诊断。超声检查结果在诊断和显示严重炎症方面均有效。超声应与实验室检查相结合,并作为临床疑似阑尾炎患者诊断途径中的标准初始影像学检查。本研究的作者认为,这种诊断途径将降低阴性阑尾切除率。

相似文献

1
How to avoid negative appendectomies: Can US achieve this?如何避免阴性阑尾切除术:超声检查能做到这一点吗?
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2017 Mar;23(2):134-138. doi: 10.5505/tjtes.2016.79328.
2
Evaluation of Platelet Indices and Red Cell Distribution Width as New Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis.血小板指标和红细胞分布宽度作为急性阑尾炎诊断新生物标志物的评估
J Invest Surg. 2018 Apr;31(2):121-129. doi: 10.1080/08941939.2017.1284964. Epub 2017 Feb 16.
3
Accuracy of White Blood Cell Count and C-reactive Protein Levels Related to Duration of Symptoms in Patients Suspected of Acute Appendicitis.疑似急性阑尾炎患者白细胞计数及C反应蛋白水平与症状持续时间的相关性准确性
Acad Emerg Med. 2015 Sep;22(9):1015-24. doi: 10.1111/acem.12746. Epub 2015 Aug 20.
4
Enterobius vermicularis: A Cause of Abdominal Pain Mimicking Acute Appendicitis in Children. A Retrospective Cohort Study.蛲虫:儿童腹痛酷似急性阑尾炎的病因。一项回顾性队列研究。
Arch Iran Med. 2018 Feb 1;21(2):67-72.
5
A fertile-aged woman with right lower abdominal pain but unelevated leukocyte count and C-reactive protein. Acute appendicitis is very unlikely.一名育龄期女性,右下腹痛,但白细胞计数和C反应蛋白未升高。急性阑尾炎的可能性极小。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 1999 Oct;384(5):437-40. doi: 10.1007/s004230050227.
6
Ultrasound, computed tomography, and laboratory findings in the diagnosis of appendicitis.超声、计算机断层扫描及实验室检查结果在阑尾炎诊断中的应用
Acta Radiol. 2007 Apr;48(3):267-73. doi: 10.1080/02841850601182162.
7
Diagnostic performance of type I hypersensitivity-specific markers combined with CRP and IL-6 in complicated acute appendicitis in pediatric patients.I 型超敏反应特异性标志物联合 CRP 和 IL-6 在儿童复杂性急性阑尾炎中的诊断性能。
Int Immunopharmacol. 2023 Nov;124(Pt B):110977. doi: 10.1016/j.intimp.2023.110977. Epub 2023 Sep 27.
8
Importance of Clinical Decision Making by Experienced Pediatric Surgeons When Children Are Suspected of Having Acute Appendicitis: The Reality in a High-Volume Pediatric Emergency Department.经验丰富的儿科外科医生在儿童疑似患有急性阑尾炎时进行临床决策的重要性:大容量儿科急诊科的实际情况
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2017 Sep;33(9):e38-e42. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000000763.
9
Hyperbilirubinemia as a predictive factor in acute appendicitis.高胆红素血症作为急性阑尾炎的预测因子。
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2016 Aug;42(4):471-476. doi: 10.1007/s00068-015-0562-4. Epub 2015 Aug 8.
10
Use of white blood cell count and negative appendectomy rate.白细胞计数和阴性阑尾切除率的应用。
Pediatrics. 2014 Jan;133(1):e39-44. doi: 10.1542/peds.2013-2418. Epub 2013 Dec 30.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of Appendicitis Scoring Systems in Childhood Appendicitis.儿童阑尾炎评分系统的比较
Turk Arch Pediatr. 2022 Sep;57(5):532-537. doi: 10.5152/TurkArchPediatr.2022.22076.