• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research >A Comparative Study of RIPASA Score and ALVARADO Score in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis
【24h】

A Comparative Study of RIPASA Score and ALVARADO Score in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis

机译：RIPASA评分和ALVARADO评分在急性阑尾炎诊断中的比较研究

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies. Different techniques have been devised to assist in equivocal cases in attempts to decrease negative appendicectomy rates. A number of scoring systems have been used for aiding in early diagnosis of acute appendicitis and its prompt management of which Alvarado score is the most popular. The accuracy of Alvarado score in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis is disappointingly low in Asian population and RIPASA scoring has been designed for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in the Asian population. So we prospectively applied and compared Alvarado and RIPASA score in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in Indian population.Materials and Methods: We compared prospectively RIPASA and Alvarado scoring system by applying them to 206 patients. Both scores were calculated for patients who presented with right iliac fossa pain during the study period. Depending on clinical judgment appendicectomy was done. Post operative histopathology report was correlated with the scores. A score of 7.5 is the optimal cut off threshold for RIPASA and 7 for Alvarado scoring system. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) for RIPASA & Alvarado system was done.Results: The sensitivity and specificity of RIPASA score were 96.2% and 90.5% respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of Alvarado score were 58.9% and 85.7% respectively. RIPASA score correctly classified 96 percent of all patients confirmed with histological acute appendicitis to the high probability group (RIPASA score greater than 7.5) compared with 58.9% with Alvarado score (Alvarado score greater than 7.0; p-value less than 0.001).Conclusion: RIPASA scoring system is more convenient, accurate, and specific scoring system for Indian population than Alvarado scoring system.
机译：背景：急性阑尾炎是最常见的外科急症之一。已经设计出不同的技术来协助模棱两可的病例，以降低阑尾切除术的不良率。许多评分系统已用于辅助急性阑尾炎的早期诊断，并对其进行快速管理，其中Alvarado评分最受欢迎。在亚洲人群中，Alvarado评分在诊断急性阑尾炎中的准确性令人失望地低，RIPASA评分已设计用于在亚洲人群中诊断急性阑尾炎。因此，我们前瞻性地应用和比较了Alvarado和RIPASA评分在印度人群急性阑尾炎的诊断中的应用。材料与方法：我们将RIPASA和Alvarado评分系统应用于206例患者进行了前瞻性比较。对于研究期间出现右right窝窝疼痛的患者，计算两个分数。根据临床判断进行阑尾切除术。术后组织病理学报告与评分相关。 RIPASA的最佳截止阈值为7.5，Alvarado评分系统的最佳截止阈值为7。对RIPASA和Alvarado系统进行敏感性，特异性，阳性预测值（PPV）和阴性预测（NPV）。结果：RIPASA评分的敏感性和特异性分别为96.2％和90.5％。 Alvarado评分的敏感性和特异性分别为58.9％和85.7％。 RIPASA评分正确地将所有组织学上急性阑尾炎确诊的患者中的96％归为高可能性组（RIPASA评分大于7.5），而Alvarado评分为58.9％（Alvarado评分大于7.0; p值小于0.001）。与Alvarado评分系统相比，RIPASA评分系统为印度人口提供了更加方便，准确和特定的评分系统。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号