Comparison of Clinical and Laboratory Manifestations Between Acute Appendicitis and Mesenteric Lymphadenitis in Children.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Acute appendicitis is a major cause of emergency surgery in children and adolescents. Mesenteric lymphadenitis is also one of the most common differential diagnoses in children with acute appendicitis, and despite its high prevalence, few clinical studies have examined its features. The clinical signs of mesenteric lymphadenitis in children are very similar to those of acute appendicitis. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical manifestations of acute appendicitis and mesenteric lymphadenitis in children.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, patients less than 15 years old admitted to the pediatric emergency center of Afzalipour Hospital in Kerman from 2018 to 2021 were studied, and those who had a final diagnosis of appendicitis, mesenteric lymphadenitis, or appendectomy were included in the study by census. Data collection from the records of these patients included age, sex, clinical signs, duration of emergency until diagnosis, fever, number of times of vomiting, leukocytosis, lymphocyte, neutrophil count, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, sonographic findings, and pathology findings. SPSS software and descriptive and analytical statistics were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

The results showed that unlike sex (p=0.11), there was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of age (p<0.001). Nausea, vomiting, anorexia, pain shift, and leukocytosis were more common in the acute appendicitis group than in the mesenteric lymphadenitis group, with a significant difference between the two groups (p<0.001). There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of neutrophil percentage and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The present study was conducted with the aim of assisting medical professionals due to the possibility of misdiagnosing mesenteric lymphadenitis with acute appendicitis. Differentiation of these two diseases is facilitated by the significant differences in their clinical signs and test results. These results can be a useful guide for physicians to better diagnose the diseases.