Alerhand Stephen, Meltzer James, Tay Ee Tein
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, NY, USA.
Albert Einstein College of Medicine, NY, USA.
Ultrasound. 2017 Aug;25(3):166-172. doi: 10.1177/1742271X16689693. Epub 2017 Jan 29.
Ultrasound scan has gained attention for diagnosing appendicitis due to its avoidance of ionizing radiation. However, studies show that ultrasound scan carries inferior sensitivity to computed tomography scan. A non-diagnostic ultrasound scan could increase the time to diagnosis and appendicectomy, particularly if follow-up computed tomography scan is needed. Some studies suggest that delaying appendicectomy increases the risk of perforation.
To investigate the risk of appendiceal perforation when using ultrasound scan as the initial diagnostic imaging modality in children with suspected appendicitis.
We retrospectively reviewed 1411 charts of children ≤17 years old diagnosed with appendicitis at two urban academic medical centers. Patients who underwent ultrasound scan first were compared to those who underwent computed tomography scan first. In the sub-group analysis, patients who only received ultrasound scan were compared to those who received initial ultrasound scan followed by computed tomography scan. Main outcome measures were appendiceal perforation rate and time from triage to appendicectomy.
In 720 children eligible for analysis, there was no significant difference in perforation rate between those who had initial ultrasound scan and those who had initial computed tomography scan (7.3% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.44), nor in those who had ultrasound scan only and those who had initial ultrasound scan followed by computed tomography scan (8.0% vs. 5.6%, p = 0.42). Those patients who had ultrasound scan first had a shorter triage-to-incision time than those who had computed tomography scan first (9.2 (IQR: 5.9, 14.0) vs. 10.2 (IQR: 7.3, 14.3) hours, p = 0.03), whereas those who had ultrasound scan followed by computed tomography scan took longer than those who had ultrasound scan only (7.8 (IQR: 5.3, 11.6) vs. 15.1 (IQR: 10.6, 20.6), p < 0.001). Children < 12 years old receiving ultrasound scan first had lower perforation rate (p = 0.01) and shorter triage-to-incision time (p = 0.003).
Children with suspected appendicitis receiving ultrasound scan as the initial diagnostic imaging modality do not have increased risk of perforation compared to those receiving computed tomography scan first. We recommend that children <12 years of age receive ultrasound scan first.
超声扫描因避免了电离辐射而在阑尾炎诊断中受到关注。然而,研究表明,超声扫描的敏感性低于计算机断层扫描。非诊断性超声扫描可能会延长诊断和阑尾切除术的时间,特别是在需要后续计算机断层扫描时。一些研究表明,延迟阑尾切除术会增加穿孔风险。
调查在疑似阑尾炎儿童中,将超声扫描作为初始诊断成像方式时阑尾穿孔的风险。
我们回顾性分析了两家城市学术医疗中心1411例17岁及以下被诊断为阑尾炎的儿童病历。将首先接受超声扫描的患者与首先接受计算机断层扫描的患者进行比较。在亚组分析中,将仅接受超声扫描的患者与先接受超声扫描后接受计算机断层扫描的患者进行比较。主要观察指标为阑尾穿孔率和从分诊到阑尾切除术的时间。
在720例符合分析条件的儿童中,首次接受超声扫描的患者与首次接受计算机断层扫描的患者的穿孔率无显著差异(7.3%对8.9%,p = 0.44),仅接受超声扫描的患者与先接受超声扫描后接受计算机断层扫描的患者的穿孔率也无显著差异(8.0%对5.6%,p = 0.42)。首次接受超声扫描的患者从分诊到手术切开的时间比首次接受计算机断层扫描的患者短(9.2(四分位间距:5.9,14.0)小时对10.2(四分位间距:7.3,14.3)小时,p = 0.03),而先接受超声扫描后接受计算机断层扫描的患者比仅接受超声扫描的患者花费时间更长(7.8(四分位间距:5.3,11.6)小时对15.1(四分位间距:10.6,20.6)小时,p < 0.001)。首次接受超声扫描的12岁以下儿童穿孔率较低(p = 0.01),从分诊到手术切开的时间较短(p = 0.003)。
与首先接受计算机断层扫描的疑似阑尾炎儿童相比,首先接受超声扫描作为初始诊断成像方式的儿童穿孔风险并未增加。我们建议12岁以下儿童首先接受超声扫描。