Loading…

Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography and ultrasound for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The diagnosis of acute appendicitis remains challenging. This review determined the current diagnostic accuracy of CT and ultrasound for suspected acute appendicitis in adults. This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA for diagnostic test accuracy guidelines. A systematic search was undertaken in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Radiography (London, England. 1995) England. 1995), 2022-11, Vol.28 (4), p.1127-1141
Main Authors: Arruzza, E., Milanese, S., Li, L.S.K., Dizon, J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The diagnosis of acute appendicitis remains challenging. This review determined the current diagnostic accuracy of CT and ultrasound for suspected acute appendicitis in adults. This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA for diagnostic test accuracy guidelines. A systematic search was undertaken in appropriate databases. Screening of potential titles and abstracts, full-text retrieval, methodological quality assessment using QUADAS, and data extraction was performed. Meta-analyses were performed for relevant subgroups, and sensitivity analysis was completed to account for outliers. GRADE was utilized to assess the certainty of findings. 31 studies evaluating CT, 10 evaluating US, and six evaluating both were included. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for CT was 0.972 [0.958, 0.981] and 0.956 [0.941, 0.967] respectively, and 0.821 [0.738, 0.882] and 0.859 [0.727, 0.933] for US, respectively. When analyzing subgroups based on the use of contrast enhancement, sensitivity and specificity was highest for CT with intravenous and oral contrast (0.992 [0.965, 0.998], 0.974 [0.936, 0.99]), compared to CT with intravenous contrast (0.955 [0.922, 0.974], 0.942 [0.916, 0.960]). Low-Dose CT produced comparable values (0.934 [0.885,0.963], 0.937 [0.911, 0.955]) relative to these subgroups and standard dose non-contrast CT (0.877 [0.774,0.937], 0.914 [0.827, 0.959]). US studies which excluded equivocal findings demonstrated significantly greater values than the remainder of US studies (p 
ISSN:1078-8174
1532-2831
DOI:10.1016/j.radi.2022.08.012