Dataset Information

Diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children using urinary 5-hydroxy indol acetic acid and pediatric appendicitis score: A randomized control trial.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Acute appendicitis in children represents a common problem. Diagnosis may be difficult due to lack of clinical data. Several scoring systems and laboratory investigations are used for diagnosis. This study aimed to build a model for diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children using urinary 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA) and pediatric appendicitis score.

Methods

This study was conducted on 191 children with suspicion of acute appendicitis. They were divided into two groups A and B. Children were evaluated in group A with pediatric appendicitis score, ultrasound, and CRP. In group B children were evaluated in the same manner of group A plus measuring of 5-HIAA.

Results

mean age was 13.3 ± 5.2 years. The mean duration of symptoms was 2.2 ± 1.4 days. The mean level of urinary 5-HIAA was 43.53 ± 24.05 in appendicitis patients in group B. In group A there were 65 cases who had appendectomy. Seventy-five children were operated in group B. Negative appendectomies were found in 13 and 7 cases in groups A and B respectively. Thirteen cases were readmitted in group A with diagnosis of acute appendicitis while seven cases were readmitted in group B.

Conclusion

This combination of urinary 5-HIAA and pediatric appendicitis score builds a model for diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children. This model improves the accuracy of diagnosis of acute appendicitis, reduces both the incidence of negative appendectomies and the incidence of readmission or missed cases in children.

SUBMITTER: Khirallah MG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8058523 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceDelayed diagnosis of appendicitis is associated with worse outcomes than timely diagnosis, but clinical features associated with diagnostic delay are uncertain, and the extent to which delays are preventable is unclear.ObjectiveTo determine clinical features associated with delayed diagnosis of pediatric appendicitis, assess the frequency of preventable delay, and compare delay outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis case-control study included 748 children treated at 5 pediatric emergency departments in the US between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2019. Participants were younger than 21 years and had a diagnosis of appendicitis.ExposuresIndividual features of appendicitis and pretest likelihood of appendicitis were measured by the Pediatric Appendicitis Risk Calculator (pARC).Main outcomes and measuresCase patients had a delayed diagnosis of appendicitis, defined as 2 emergency department visits leading to diagnosis and a case review showing the patient likely had appendicitis at the first visit. Control patients had a single emergency department visit yielding a diagnosis. Clinical features and pARC scores were compared by case-control status. Preventability of delay was assessed as unlikely, possible, or likely. The proportion of children with indicated imaging based on an evidence-based cost-effectiveness threshold was determined. Outcomes of delayed diagnosis were compared by case-control status, including hospital length of stay, perforation, and multiple surgical procedures.ResultsA total of 748 children (mean [SD] age, 10.2 [4.3] years; 392 boys [52.4%]; 427 White children [57.1%]) were included in the study; 471 (63.0%) had a delayed diagnosis of appendicitis, and 277 (37.0%) had no delay in diagnosis. Children with a delayed diagnosis were less likely to have pain with walking (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.16; 95% CI, 0.10-0.25), maximal pain in the right lower quadrant (aOR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.07-0.19), and abdominal guarding (aOR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.21-0.51), and were more likely to have a complex chronic condition (aOR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.05-5.23). The pretest likelihood of appendicitis was 39% to 52% lower in children with a delayed vs timely diagnosis. Among children with a delayed diagnosis, 109 cases (23.1%) were likely to be preventable, and 247 (52.4%) were possibly preventable. Indicated imaging was performed in 104 (22.0%) to 289 (61.3%) children with delayed diagnosis, depending on the imputation method for missing data on white blood cell count. Patients with delayed diagnosis had longer hospital length of stay (mean difference between the groups, 2.8 days; 95% CI, 2.3-3.4 days) and higher perforation rates (OR, 7.8; 95% CI, 5.5-11.3) and were more likely to undergo 2 or more surgical procedures (OR, 8.0; 95% CI, 2.0-70.4).Conclusions and relevanceIn this case-control study, delayed appendicitis was associated with initially milder symptoms but worse outcomes. These findings suggest that a majority of delayed diagnoses were at least possibly preventable and that many of these patients did not undergo indicated imaging, suggesting an opportunity to prevent delayed diagnosis of appendicitis in some children.

Project description:Acute appendicitis is one of the major causes for emergency surgery in childhood and adolescence. Appendectomy is still the therapy of choice, but conservative strategies are increasingly being studied for uncomplicated inflammation. Diagnosis of acute appendicitis remains challenging, especially due to the frequently unspecific clinical picture. Inflammatory blood markers and imaging methods like ultrasound are limited as they have to be interpreted by experts and still do not offer sufficient diagnostic certainty. This study presents a method for automatic diagnosis of appendicitis as well as the differentiation between complicated and uncomplicated inflammation using values/parameters which are routinely and unbiasedly obtained for each patient with suspected appendicitis. We analyzed full blood counts, c-reactive protein (CRP) and appendiceal diameters in ultrasound investigations corresponding to children and adolescents aged 0-17 years from a hospital based population in Berlin, Germany. A total of 590 patients (473 patients with appendicitis in histopathology and 117 with negative histopathological findings) were analyzed retrospectively with modern algorithms from machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI). The discovery of informative parameters (biomarker signatures) and training of the classification model were done with a maximum of 35% of the patients. The remaining minimum 65% of patients were used for validation. At clinical relevant cut-off points the accuracy of the biomarker signature for diagnosis of appendicitis was 90% (93% sensitivity, 67% specificity), while the accuracy to correctly identify complicated inflammation was 51% (95% sensitivity, 33% specificity) on validation data. Such a test would be capable to prevent two out of three patients without appendicitis from useless surgery as well as one out of three patients with uncomplicated appendicitis. The presented method has the potential to change today's therapeutic approach for appendicitis and demonstrates the capability of algorithms from AI and ML to significantly improve diagnostics even based on routine diagnostic parameters.