Loading…
Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals
Introduction There are a variety of conflicting recommendations in the literature for pre-operative imaging in acute appendicitis. There is debate over what the ideal imaging protocol is to lower the negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) without increasing missed appendicitis. The aim of this study is...
Saved in:
Published in: | Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) CA), 2022-12, Vol.14 (12), p.e32389-e32389 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
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!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-7c8979dfd20bf34499d9b1d992dfd913b8291605e737da2425ea0514aff3e8563 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-7c8979dfd20bf34499d9b1d992dfd913b8291605e737da2425ea0514aff3e8563 |
container_end_page | e32389 |
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | e32389 |
container_title | Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) |
container_volume | 14 |
creator | Symonds, Tristan Buschel, Helen Avramovic, John Palamuthusingam, Pranavan |
description | Introduction There are a variety of conflicting recommendations in the literature for pre-operative imaging in acute appendicitis. There is debate over what the ideal imaging protocol is to lower the negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) without increasing missed appendicitis. The aim of this study is to compare the audited NAR between two groups with different imaging approaches: (i) mandatory pre-operative computed tomography (CT) imaging and (ii) selective imaging with CT, ultrasound (US), or no imaging prior to appendicectomy. Materials and methods A retrospective chart audit was conducted of 400 patients who underwent an appendicectomy at two hospitals with different approaches to pre-operative imaging (hospital A and hospital B). The primary outcome measure was histologically confirmed appendicitis. It was also documented whether there was radiological (CT or US) evidence of appendicitis. Results At hospital A, all 200 patients underwent CT imaging prior to appendicectomy. The total histologically confirmed NAR for this group was 9.5% (19/200). At hospital B, 97 (48.5%) patients underwent CT, 41 (25.5%) underwent US, 10 (5%) had both US and CT, and 52 (26%) had no imaging. The total NAR was 11.5% (23/200). Conclusion There was no statistically significant difference (p=0.62) in audited NARs when comparing clinician-guided selective imaging versus routine CT imaging for all patients undergoing appendicectomy. |
doi_str_mv | 10.7759/cureus.32389 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9830005</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2771227491</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-7c8979dfd20bf34499d9b1d992dfd913b8291605e737da2425ea0514aff3e8563</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkc1r3DAQxUVpacImt56LoJceuok-bEvqobAsTRMIDSTbXoXWGjsKtuXqI2X_-yrZNKQ9zTDz4zFvHkLvKDkRolanbQ6Q4wlnXKpX6JDRRi4lldXrF_0BOo7xjhBCiWBEkLfogDcNZ6ySh2i-9jm5CfDaj3NOYPHGj74PZr7d4Z8QYo74BgZok7sHfDGa3k39Z7ya8Cpbl7Dv8HfozeN2Nc8wWdcW2I87fG0SROwmvPnt8bmPs0tmiEfoTVcKHD_VBfpx9nWzPl9eXn27WK8uly2vWFqKViqhbGcZ2Xa8qpSyakutUqzMFOVbyRRtSA2CC2tYxWowpKaV6ToOsm74An3Z6855O4JtYUrBDHoObjRhp71x-t_N5G517--1krz8qi4CH58Egv-VISY9utjCMJgJfI6aiaYmgirJCvrhP_TO5zAVe4USlDFRlZMX6NOeaoOPMUD3fAwl-iFNvU9TP6ZZ8PcvDTzDf7PjfwDF4p04</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2771227491</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Symonds, Tristan ; Buschel, Helen ; Avramovic, John ; Palamuthusingam, Pranavan</creator><creatorcontrib>Symonds, Tristan ; Buschel, Helen ; Avramovic, John ; Palamuthusingam, Pranavan</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction There are a variety of conflicting recommendations in the literature for pre-operative imaging in acute appendicitis. There is debate over what the ideal imaging protocol is to lower the negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) without increasing missed appendicitis. The aim of this study is to compare the audited NAR between two groups with different imaging approaches: (i) mandatory pre-operative computed tomography (CT) imaging and (ii) selective imaging with CT, ultrasound (US), or no imaging prior to appendicectomy. Materials and methods A retrospective chart audit was conducted of 400 patients who underwent an appendicectomy at two hospitals with different approaches to pre-operative imaging (hospital A and hospital B). The primary outcome measure was histologically confirmed appendicitis. It was also documented whether there was radiological (CT or US) evidence of appendicitis. Results At hospital A, all 200 patients underwent CT imaging prior to appendicectomy. The total histologically confirmed NAR for this group was 9.5% (19/200). At hospital B, 97 (48.5%) patients underwent CT, 41 (25.5%) underwent US, 10 (5%) had both US and CT, and 52 (26%) had no imaging. The total NAR was 11.5% (23/200). Conclusion There was no statistically significant difference (p=0.62) in audited NARs when comparing clinician-guided selective imaging versus routine CT imaging for all patients undergoing appendicectomy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2168-8184</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2168-8184</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.7759/cureus.32389</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36632248</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Cureus Inc</publisher><subject>Appendectomy ; Appendicitis ; Audits ; Emergency Medicine ; General Surgery ; Histology ; Hospitals ; Medical imaging ; Pathology ; Patients ; Radiology ; Tomography ; Ultrasonic imaging</subject><ispartof>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA), 2022-12, Vol.14 (12), p.e32389-e32389</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2022, Symonds et al.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022, Symonds et al. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022, Symonds et al. 2022 Symonds et al.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-7c8979dfd20bf34499d9b1d992dfd913b8291605e737da2425ea0514aff3e8563</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-7c8979dfd20bf34499d9b1d992dfd913b8291605e737da2425ea0514aff3e8563</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2771227491/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2771227491?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25752,27923,27924,37011,37012,44589,53790,53792,74997</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36632248$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Symonds, Tristan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buschel, Helen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Avramovic, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palamuthusingam, Pranavan</creatorcontrib><title>Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals</title><title>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA)</title><addtitle>Cureus</addtitle><description>Introduction There are a variety of conflicting recommendations in the literature for pre-operative imaging in acute appendicitis. There is debate over what the ideal imaging protocol is to lower the negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) without increasing missed appendicitis. The aim of this study is to compare the audited NAR between two groups with different imaging approaches: (i) mandatory pre-operative computed tomography (CT) imaging and (ii) selective imaging with CT, ultrasound (US), or no imaging prior to appendicectomy. Materials and methods A retrospective chart audit was conducted of 400 patients who underwent an appendicectomy at two hospitals with different approaches to pre-operative imaging (hospital A and hospital B). The primary outcome measure was histologically confirmed appendicitis. It was also documented whether there was radiological (CT or US) evidence of appendicitis. Results At hospital A, all 200 patients underwent CT imaging prior to appendicectomy. The total histologically confirmed NAR for this group was 9.5% (19/200). At hospital B, 97 (48.5%) patients underwent CT, 41 (25.5%) underwent US, 10 (5%) had both US and CT, and 52 (26%) had no imaging. The total NAR was 11.5% (23/200). Conclusion There was no statistically significant difference (p=0.62) in audited NARs when comparing clinician-guided selective imaging versus routine CT imaging for all patients undergoing appendicectomy.</description><subject>Appendectomy</subject><subject>Appendicitis</subject><subject>Audits</subject><subject>Emergency Medicine</subject><subject>General Surgery</subject><subject>Histology</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Pathology</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Tomography</subject><subject>Ultrasonic imaging</subject><issn>2168-8184</issn><issn>2168-8184</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkc1r3DAQxUVpacImt56LoJceuok-bEvqobAsTRMIDSTbXoXWGjsKtuXqI2X_-yrZNKQ9zTDz4zFvHkLvKDkRolanbQ6Q4wlnXKpX6JDRRi4lldXrF_0BOo7xjhBCiWBEkLfogDcNZ6ySh2i-9jm5CfDaj3NOYPHGj74PZr7d4Z8QYo74BgZok7sHfDGa3k39Z7ya8Cpbl7Dv8HfozeN2Nc8wWdcW2I87fG0SROwmvPnt8bmPs0tmiEfoTVcKHD_VBfpx9nWzPl9eXn27WK8uly2vWFqKViqhbGcZ2Xa8qpSyakutUqzMFOVbyRRtSA2CC2tYxWowpKaV6ToOsm74An3Z6855O4JtYUrBDHoObjRhp71x-t_N5G517--1krz8qi4CH58Egv-VISY9utjCMJgJfI6aiaYmgirJCvrhP_TO5zAVe4USlDFRlZMX6NOeaoOPMUD3fAwl-iFNvU9TP6ZZ8PcvDTzDf7PjfwDF4p04</recordid><startdate>20221210</startdate><enddate>20221210</enddate><creator>Symonds, Tristan</creator><creator>Buschel, Helen</creator><creator>Avramovic, John</creator><creator>Palamuthusingam, Pranavan</creator><general>Cureus Inc</general><general>Cureus</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20221210</creationdate><title>Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals</title><author>Symonds, Tristan ; Buschel, Helen ; Avramovic, John ; Palamuthusingam, Pranavan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-7c8979dfd20bf34499d9b1d992dfd913b8291605e737da2425ea0514aff3e8563</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Appendectomy</topic><topic>Appendicitis</topic><topic>Audits</topic><topic>Emergency Medicine</topic><topic>General Surgery</topic><topic>Histology</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Pathology</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Tomography</topic><topic>Ultrasonic imaging</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Symonds, Tristan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buschel, Helen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Avramovic, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palamuthusingam, Pranavan</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Symonds, Tristan</au><au>Buschel, Helen</au><au>Avramovic, John</au><au>Palamuthusingam, Pranavan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals</atitle><jtitle>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA)</jtitle><addtitle>Cureus</addtitle><date>2022-12-10</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>e32389</spage><epage>e32389</epage><pages>e32389-e32389</pages><issn>2168-8184</issn><eissn>2168-8184</eissn><abstract>Introduction There are a variety of conflicting recommendations in the literature for pre-operative imaging in acute appendicitis. There is debate over what the ideal imaging protocol is to lower the negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) without increasing missed appendicitis. The aim of this study is to compare the audited NAR between two groups with different imaging approaches: (i) mandatory pre-operative computed tomography (CT) imaging and (ii) selective imaging with CT, ultrasound (US), or no imaging prior to appendicectomy. Materials and methods A retrospective chart audit was conducted of 400 patients who underwent an appendicectomy at two hospitals with different approaches to pre-operative imaging (hospital A and hospital B). The primary outcome measure was histologically confirmed appendicitis. It was also documented whether there was radiological (CT or US) evidence of appendicitis. Results At hospital A, all 200 patients underwent CT imaging prior to appendicectomy. The total histologically confirmed NAR for this group was 9.5% (19/200). At hospital B, 97 (48.5%) patients underwent CT, 41 (25.5%) underwent US, 10 (5%) had both US and CT, and 52 (26%) had no imaging. The total NAR was 11.5% (23/200). Conclusion There was no statistically significant difference (p=0.62) in audited NARs when comparing clinician-guided selective imaging versus routine CT imaging for all patients undergoing appendicectomy.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Cureus Inc</pub><pmid>36632248</pmid><doi>10.7759/cureus.32389</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2168-8184 |
ispartof | Curēus (Palo Alto, CA), 2022-12, Vol.14 (12), p.e32389-e32389 |
issn | 2168-8184 2168-8184 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9830005 |
source | Publicly Available Content Database; PubMed Central |
subjects | Appendectomy Appendicitis Audits Emergency Medicine General Surgery Histology Hospitals Medical imaging Pathology Patients Radiology Tomography Ultrasonic imaging |
title | Routine Computed Tomography Versus Selective Imaging: An Audit of Negative Appendicectomy Rates in Two Hospitals |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T23%3A50%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Routine%20Computed%20Tomography%20Versus%20Selective%20Imaging:%20An%20Audit%20of%20Negative%20Appendicectomy%20Rates%20in%20Two%20Hospitals&rft.jtitle=Cur%C4%93us%20(Palo%20Alto,%20CA)&rft.au=Symonds,%20Tristan&rft.date=2022-12-10&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=e32389&rft.epage=e32389&rft.pages=e32389-e32389&rft.issn=2168-8184&rft.eissn=2168-8184&rft_id=info:doi/10.7759/cureus.32389&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2771227491%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-7c8979dfd20bf34499d9b1d992dfd913b8291605e737da2425ea0514aff3e8563%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2771227491&rft_id=info:pmid/36632248&rfr_iscdi=true |