Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, Tergooi Medical Center, Hilversum, The Netherlands.
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2024 Jun;50(3):837-845. doi: 10.1007/s00068-023-02442-2. Epub 2024 Jan 17.
To determine the accuracy of final judgements of doctors at the emergency department (ED) and radiologists to differentiate between complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis, because these have different treatment options.
This prospective, multicenter study included adult patients with imaging-confirmed acute appendicitis, operated with intention to appendectomy. Both doctors at ED and radiologists assessed appendicitis severity as a final judgement of "uncomplicated" or "complicated" appendicitis. Doctors at ED integrated clinical, laboratory, and imaging findings. Radiologists relied solely on imaging findings. Outcomes were accuracy of these judgements for diagnosis of complicated appendicitis compared to the reference standard by an adjudication committee.
After imaging, 1070 patients with confirmed acute appendicitis were included. Doctors at ED accurately labelled 656 of 701 (93.6%) patients with true uncomplicated appendicitis as uncomplicated, and 163 of 369 (44.2%) patients with true complicated appendicitis were labelled as complicated. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) for complicated appendicitis were 44.2%, 93.6%, and 78.4% and 76.1%, respectively. Comparable accuracy was found for the radiologist's assessment in 941 patients, with true positive rates of 92.2% (581 of 630 patients) for uncomplicated appendicitis and 46.6% (145 of 311 patients) for complicated appendicitis.
More than half of all patients with true complicated appendicitis is incorrectly classified as uncomplicated appendicitis according to the judgements of doctors at ED, integrating clinical, laboratory, and imaging results, and of radiologists assessing diagnostic imaging. These judgements are thereby not sufficiently reliable in ruling out complicated appendicitis.
确定急诊科(ED)医生和放射科医生区分复杂和非复杂急性阑尾炎的最终判断的准确性,因为这两种情况有不同的治疗选择。
这项前瞻性、多中心研究纳入了经影像学证实的急性阑尾炎且行阑尾切除术的成年患者。ED 的医生和放射科医生均将阑尾炎严重程度评估为“非复杂”或“复杂”阑尾炎的最终判断。ED 的医生整合了临床、实验室和影像学发现。放射科医生仅依靠影像学发现。这些判断在诊断复杂阑尾炎方面的准确性与裁决委员会的参考标准进行比较。
在进行影像学检查后,共纳入 1070 例经证实的急性阑尾炎患者。ED 的医生准确地将 701 例真正非复杂性阑尾炎患者中的 656 例(93.6%)标记为非复杂性,将 369 例真正复杂性阑尾炎患者中的 163 例(44.2%)标记为复杂性。复杂性阑尾炎的敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值(PPV 和 NPV)分别为 44.2%、93.6%、78.4%和 76.1%。在 941 例患者中,放射科医生的评估也具有类似的准确性,真正非复杂性阑尾炎的阳性率为 92.2%(581/630 例),而真正复杂性阑尾炎的阳性率为 46.6%(145/311 例)。
根据 ED 医生整合临床、实验室和影像学结果以及评估诊断影像学的放射科医生的判断,超过一半的真正复杂性阑尾炎患者被错误地归类为非复杂性阑尾炎。因此,这些判断在排除复杂性阑尾炎方面的可靠性不足。