The Role of Digital Rectal Examination for Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Takada T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4557952 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundImproved diagnostic biomarkers are required for acute appendicitis. The circulating fibrocyte percentage (CFP) is increased in inflammatory states, but has not been studied in acute appendicitis. This study aimed to determine CFP in acute appendicitis and compare diagnostic accuracy with standard serological biomarkers.MethodsA prospective cohort study was carried out between June 2015 and February 2016 at University Hospital Limerick. The CFP was determined by dual-staining peripheral venous samples for CD45 and collagen I using fluorescence-activated cell sorting, and correlated with histopathological diagnoses. The accuracy of CFP in determining histological acute appendicitis was characterized and compared with the white cell count, C-reactive protein concentration, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count and neutrophil : lymphocyte ratio.ResultsOf 95 adults recruited, 15 were healthy individuals and 80 had suspected appendicitis at presentation. Forty-six of these 80 patients had an appendicectomy, of whom 34 had histologically confirmed appendicitis. The CFP was statistically higher in patients with pathologically proven acute appendicitis than in healthy controls (median 6·1 (i.q.r. 1·6-11·6) versus 2·3 (0·9-3·4) per cent respectively; P = 0·008). The diagnostic accuracy of CFP, as determined using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, was similar to that of standard biomarkers. In multinomial regression analysis, only raised CFP was retained as an independent prognostic determinant of acute appendicitis (odds ratio 1·57, 95 per cent c.i. 1·05 to 2·33; P = 0·027).ConclusionThe CFP is increased in histologically confirmed acute appendicitis and is as accurate as standard serological biomarkers in terms of diagnosis.
| S-EPMC7709380 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposePatients presenting with acute appendicitis are usually hospitalized for a few days for appendectomy and postoperative recovery. Shortening length of stay may reduce costs and improve patient satisfaction. The purpose of this study was to assess the safety of same-day discharge after appendectomy for acute appendicitis.MethodsA systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. A literature search of EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar was conducted from inception to April 14, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened the literature and selected studies that addressed discharge on the same calendar day as the appendectomy. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROBINS-I tool. Main outcomes were hospital readmission, complications, and unplanned hospital visits in the postoperative course. A random effects model was used to pool risk ratios for the main outcomes.ResultsOf the 1912 articles screened, 17 comparative studies and 8 non-comparative studies met the inclusion criteria. Most only included laparoscopic procedure for uncomplicated appendicitis. Most studies were considered at moderate or serious risk of bias. In meta-analysis, same-day discharge (vs. overnight hospitalization) was not associated with increased rates of readmission, complication, and unplanned hospital visits. Non-comparative studies demonstrated low rates of readmission, complications, and unplanned hospital visits after same-day discharge.ConclusionThis study suggests that same-day discharge after laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis is safe without an increased risk of readmission, complications, or unplanned hospital visits. Hence, same-day discharge may be further encouraged in selected patients.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration no. CRD42018115948.
| S-EPMC8119270 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although the main cause of appendicitis is unclear, infection with Enterobius vermicularis is suggested as a neglected risk factor. Since, there is no comprehensive analysis to estimate the prevalence of E. vermicularis in appendicitis; therefore, we conducted a global-scale systematic review and meta-analysis study to estimate the prevalence of E. vermicularis infection in appendicitis cases. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases were systematically searched for relevant studies published until 15 August 2019. Pooled prevalence of E. vermicularis infection was estimated using the random effects model. Data were classified based on the continents and countries. Moreover, subgroup analyses regarding the gender, the human development index (HDI), and income level of countries were also performed. Fifty-nine studies involving 103195 appendix tissue samples belonging to the individuals of appendicitis were included. The pooled prevalence of E. vermicularis infection was (4%, 95%CI, 2-6%), with the highest prevalence (8%, 95% CI: 0-36%) and lowest prevalence (2%, 95% CI: 1-4%) in Africa and Americas continents, respectively. With respect to countries, the lowest and highest prevalence rates were reported from Venezuela (<1%, 95% CI: 0-1%) and Nigeria (33%, 95% CI: 17-52%), respectively. Indeed, a higher prevalence was observed in females, as well as in countries with lower levels of income and HDI. Our findings indicate the relatively high burden of E. vermicularis infection in appendicitis cases. However, our findings suggest the great need for more epidemiological studies to depth understand overlaps between E. vermicularis infection and appendicitis in countries with lower HDI and income levels.
| S-EPMC7179856 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAcute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies worldwide. Clinical scoring system systems have been developed to diagnose acute appendicitis, but insufficient to predict the complication. The amount of serum biomarkers elevates in response to acute inflammation, which could be beneficial for diagnostic tools. Accordingly, a meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of platelet indices, including mean platelet volume (MVP) and platelet distribution width (PDW) as potential biomarkers for the diagnosis of a diagnosis of acute appendicitis.Material and methodsThe dataset was defined by searching for articles published until December 2020 from PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar and the Cochrane database. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager Software version 5.4.1.ResultsThe final analysis was made from 9 studies, including 3124 patients. The results demonstrated that lower MPV values was significantly associated with acute appendicitis (odds ratio (OR) = 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -1.51 to -0.11, P = 0.02), but not associated with complicated appendicitis by comparing it with the control (OR = -0.13,95% CI = -0.33 to -0.07, P = 0.19) and non-complicated appendicitis groups (OR = -0.13,95% CI = -0.30 to -0.04, P = 0.14). The present study failed to demonstrate the diagnostic value of PDW for the prediction of appendicitis and its complication.ConclusionThe results of the meta-analysis strongly indicate that a lower MVP values could function as a marker for predicting the acute appendicitis.
| S-EPMC8181186 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Alvarado score can be used to stratify patients with symptoms of suspected appendicitis; the validity of the score in certain patient groups and at different cut points is still unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the discrimination (diagnostic accuracy) and calibration performance of the Alvarado score.MethodsA systematic search of validation studies in Medline, Embase, DARE and The Cochrane library was performed up to April 2011. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the score at the two cut-off points: score of 5 (1 to 4 vs. 5 to 10) and score of 7 (1 to 6 vs. 7 to 10). Calibration was analysed across low (1 to 4), intermediate (5 to 6) and high (7 to 10) risk strata. The analysis focused on three sub-groups: men, women and children.ResultsForty-two studies were included in the review. In terms of diagnostic accuracy, the cut-point of 5 was good at 'ruling out' admission for appendicitis (sensitivity 99% overall, 96% men, 99% woman, 99% children). At the cut-point of 7, recommended for 'ruling in' appendicitis and progression to surgery, the score performed poorly in each subgroup (specificity overall 81%, men 57%, woman 73%, children 76%). The Alvarado score is well calibrated in men across all risk strata (low RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.28; intermediate 1.09, 0.86 to 1.37 and high 1.02, 0.97 to 1.08). The score over-predicts the probability of appendicitis in children in the intermediate and high risk groups and in women across all risk strata.ConclusionsThe Alvarado score is a useful diagnostic 'rule out' score at a cut point of 5 for all patient groups. The score is well calibrated in men, inconsistent in children and over-predicts the probability of appendicitis in women across all strata of risk.
| S-EPMC3299622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with obstruction to the left ventricular outflow tract from degenerative aortic stenosis (AS) usually do not become symptomatic until their disease becomes graded as severe. We sought to assess the accuracy of the physical examination for the diagnosis of AS of at least moderate severity.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and cohorts of patients who received a cardiovascular physical examination prior to receiving a left heart catheterization or an echocardiogram. PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Embase were searched with a date range from inception through December 10, 2021, without language restrictions.ResultsOur systematic review yielded 7 observational studies with adequate data to perform a meta-analysis on 3 physical examination assessments. Auscultating a diminished second heart sound (likelihood ratio [LR] = 10.87, 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.94-30.12, P < 0.05) and palpating a delayed carotid upstroke (LR = 9.04, 95% CI, 3.12-25.44, P < 0.05) are useful for detecting AS of at least moderate severity. The absence of a systolic murmur radiating to the neck (LR = 0.11, 95% CI, 0.06-0.23, P < 0.05) rules against AS of at least moderate severity.ConclusionsLow-quality evidence from observational studies supports a diminished second heart sound and a delayed carotid upstroke as having moderate accuracy in diagnosing the presence of AS of at least moderate severity, whereas the absence of a murmur radiating to the neck is equally accurate in excluding this diagnosis.
| S-EPMC10290951 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Meta-analyses and a recent guideline acknowledge that conservative management of uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics can be successful for patients who wish to avoid surgery. However, guidance as to specific management does not exist. METHODS:PUBMED and EMBASE search of trials describing methods of conservative treatment was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RESULTS:Thirty-four studies involving 2,944 antibiotic-treated participants were identified. The greatest experience with conservative treatment is in persons 5 to 50 years of age. In most trials, imaging was used to confirm localized appendicitis without evidence of abscess, phlegmon, or tumor. Antibiotics regimens were generally consistent with intra-abdominal infection treatment guidelines and used for a total of 7 to 10 days. Approaches ranged from 3-day hospitalization on parenteral agents to same-day hospital or ED discharge of stable patients with outpatient oral antibiotics. Minimum time allowed before response was evaluated varied from 8 to 72 hours. Although pain was a common criterion for nonresponse and appendectomy, analgesic regimens were poorly described. Trials differed in use of other response indicators, that is, white blood cell count, C-reactive protein, and reimaging. Diet ranged from restriction for 48 hours to as tolerated. Initial response rates were generally greater than 90% and most participants improved by 24 to 48 hours, with no related severe sepsis or deaths. In most studies, appendectomy was recommended for recurrence; however, in several, patients had antibiotic retreatment with success. CONCLUSION:While further investigation of conservative treatment is ongoing, patients considering this approach should be advised and managed according to study methods and related guidelines to promote informed shared decision-making and optimize their chance of similar outcomes as described in published trials. Future studies that address biases associated with enrollment and response evaluation, employ best-practice pain control and antibiotic selection, better define cancer risk, and explore longer time thresholds for response, minimized diet restriction and hospital stays, and antibiotic re-treatment will further our understanding of the potential effectiveness of conservative management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Systematic review, level II.
| S-EPMC6437084 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAcute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency and can represent a challenging diagnosis, with a negative appendectomy rate as high as 20 %. This review aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of individual biomarkers in the diagnosis of appendicitis and appraise the quality of these studies.MethodsA systematic review of the literature between January 2000 and September 2015 using of PubMed, OvidMedline, EMBASE and Google Scholar was conducted. Studies in which the diagnostic accuracy, statistical heterogeneity and predictive ability for severity of several biomarkers could be elicited were included. Information regarding costs and process times was retrieved from the regional laboratory. European surgeons blinded to these reviews were independently asked to rank which characteristics of biomarkers were most important in acute appendicitis to inform a cost-benefit trade-off. Sensitivity testing and the QUADAS-2 tool were used to assess the robustness of the analysis and study quality, respectively.ResultsSixty-two studies met the inclusion criteria and were assessed. Traditional biomarkers (such as white cell count) were found to have a moderate diagnostic accuracy (0.75) but lower costs in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Conversely, novel markers (pro-calcitonin, IL 6 and urinary 5-HIAA) were found to have high process-related costs including analytical times, but improved diagnostic accuracy. QUADAS-2 analysis revealed significant potential biases in the literature.ConclusionWhen assessing biomarkers, an appreciation of the trade-offs between the costs and benefits of individual biomarkers is needed. Further studies should seek to investigate new biomarkers and address concerns over bias, in order to improve the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.
| S-EPMC5315733 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In rectal cancer, preoperative staging should identify early tumours suitable for treatment by surgery alone and locally advanced tumours that require therapy to induce tumour regression from the potential resection margin. Currently, local staging can be performed by digital rectal examination (DRE), endoluminal ultrasound (EUS) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Each staging method was compared for clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness. The accuracy of high-resolution MRI, DRE and EUS in identifying favourable, unfavourable and locally advanced rectal carcinomas in 98 patients undergoing total mesorectal excision was compared prospectively against the resection specimen pathological as the gold standard. Agreement between each staging modality with pathology assessment of tumour favourability was calculated with the chance-corrected agreement given as the kappa statistic, based on marginal homogenised data. Differences in effectiveness of the staging modalities were compared with differences in costs of the staging modalities to generate cost effectiveness ratios. Agreement between staging and histologic assessment of tumour favourability was 94% for MRI (kappa=0.81, s.e.=0.05; kappa(W)=0.83), compared with very poor agreements of 65% for DRE (kappa=0.08, s.e.=0.068, kappa(W)=0.16) and 69% for EUS (kappa=0.17, s.e.=0.065, kappa(W)=0.17). The resource benefits resulting from the use of MRI rather than DRE was 67164 UK pounds and 92244 UK pounds when MRI was used rather than EUS. Magnetic resonance imaging dominated both DRE and EUS on cost and clinical effectiveness by selecting appropriate patients for neoadjuvant therapy and justifies its use for local staging of rectal cancer patients.
| S-EPMC2364763 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundTo assess the efficacy of artificial intelligence (AI) models in diagnosing and prognosticating acute appendicitis (AA) in adult patients compared to traditional methods. AA is a common cause of emergency department visits and abdominal surgeries. It is typically diagnosed through clinical assessments, laboratory tests, and imaging studies. However, traditional diagnostic methods can be time-consuming and inaccurate. Machine learning models have shown promise in improving diagnostic accuracy and predicting outcomes.Main bodyA systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines was conducted, searching PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Studies were evaluated for risk of bias using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Data points extracted included model type, input features, validation strategies, and key performance metrics.ResultsIn total, 29 studies were analyzed, out of which 21 focused on diagnosis, seven on prognosis, and one on both. Artificial neural networks (ANNs) were the most commonly employed algorithm for diagnosis. Both ANN and logistic regression were also widely used for categorizing types of AA. ANNs showed high performance in most cases, with accuracy rates often exceeding 80% and AUC values peaking at 0.985. The models also demonstrated promising results in predicting postoperative outcomes such as sepsis risk and ICU admission. Risk of bias was identified in a majority of studies, with selection bias and lack of internal validation being the most common issues.ConclusionAI algorithms demonstrate significant promise in diagnosing and prognosticating AA, often surpassing traditional methods and clinical scores such as the Alvarado scoring system in terms of speed and accuracy.
| S-EPMC10729387 | biostudies-literature