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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) CA), 2022-12, Vol.14 (12), p.e32389-e32389
Main Authors: Symonds, Tristan, Buschel, Helen, Avramovic, John, Palamuthusingam, Pranavan
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 &amp; 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 &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; 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