Objective: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of the Alvarado score for the de Alvarado como recurso clínico para el diagnóstico de la apendicitis aguda. de escalas diagnósticas de apendicitis aguda: Alvarado, RIPASA y AIR and has better accuracy for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Introducción: la apendicitis aguda constituye la primera causa de Los mejores valores diagnósticos de la enfermedad para la escala fueron aquellos con.

Author: JoJogis Mem
Country: Portugal
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Technology
Published (Last): 27 May 2005
Pages: 63
PDF File Size: 3.68 Mb
ePub File Size: 5.51 Mb
ISBN: 235-9-57622-665-2
Downloads: 34424
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Brahn

The Alvarado score published in is an assessment chart Table 1whose sum gives a maximum of 10 points with a higher probability that the patient has AA.

From This Paper Figures, tables, and topics from this paper. Methods An analytical, observational study was conducted between June 1 and December 31, in patients of both sexes who were 18 years of age or older and came to the emergency department of the Hospital de Alta Especialidad of Veracruz with suspected diagnosis of AA and underwent appendectomy.

Has misdiagnosis of appendicitis decreased over time? It is still a difficult diagnosis to make, especially in young persons, the elderly, and in reproductive-age women, in whom a series of inflammatory conditions can have signs and symptoms similar to those of acute appendicitis. The higher the score obtained, the greater the probability that the patient has AA. The variability of figures observed between the studies may also be secondary to an effect of the population from which the sample was extracted.

The mean body mass index was The differences observed between both scores were not statistically significant. Different scoring systems have been created to increase diagnostic accuracy, and they are inexpensive, noninvasive, and easy to use and reproduce.

More than one patient presented more than one comorbidity. Upon applying the grading systems to the patients in the study, we found that the RIPASA score showed greater diagnostic certainty compared to the Alvarado score, with a sensitivity of In contrast, Nanjundaiah et al.


By clicking accept or continuing to use the site, you agree to the terms outlined in our Privacy PolicyTerms of Serviceand Dataset License. Are negative appendectomies still acceptable?.

To improve our services and products, we use “cookies” own or third parties authorized to show advertising related to client preferences through the analyses of navigation customer behavior. Edematous appendicitis was observed in 2 cases, phlegmonous appendicitis in 30 patients, necrotic appendicitis in 21, and perforated appendicitis in 33 cases. Singapore Med J, 52pp.

J Clin Diagn Res, 8pp. In order to avoid delay in the diagnosis of apendicitus appendicitis and reduce the margin of error, the use of scales has been used. Leukocytosis higher than lara Likewise, we determined that the cut-off point for the Alvarado score can be as low as 6.


Rev Hosp Juarez Mex, 76pp. In the handling of the data, confidentiality was maintained and patient anonymity was respected.

Our research assessed the utility of such scales in the population of the eastern region of the country, and greater sensitivity and specificity were found with the RIPASA score. Vera aPedro M.

There was a problem providing the content you requested

Clinical Implications of Diverticular Disease of the In conclusion, the RIPASA score presents greater accuracy and reliability as a diagnostic test compared to the Alvarado score and is helpful in making appropriate therapeutic decisions. One of the researchers was responsible for coding patient data, using numbers instead of names.

Prospective, longitudinal, analytical, comparative criteruos observational study. The RIPASA system has 18 variables divided into 4 groups data, signs, symptoms and laboratory studies giving them a value of 0. Usefulness of the Alvarado scoring system with respect to age, sex and time of presentation, with regression analysis of individual parameters.


After patients were discharged, they were followed-up in the outpatient setting for at least 30 days. ROC curves obtained by calculating the results of both scores. There were no deaths during the present study. Once the score is established, the diagnosis of appendicitis is classified as doubtful with less than 5 points, suggestive from 5 to 6 points, probable from 7 to 8 points, and very probable from 9 to 10 points.

One billion dollars are spent each year on negative appendectomies, 4,5 so high rates of negative appendectomies are no longer acceptable. The average time between the onset of the symptoms and the first medical alvatado was Topics Discussed in This Paper. Resultados Se incluyeron pacientes.

In order to avoid delayed diagnosis, to reduce the margin of error and to identify patients requiring emergency surgery or patients without AA, the application of a scoring scale would be very useful.

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the Alvarado and RIPASA scores in the clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis and to correlate with the histopathological results.

APENDICITIS by Gustavo Rondon on Prezi

It should be mentioned that axial tomography is not a study that is routinely requested at our hospital in cases of suspected AA. Some features of this site may not work without it. Show full item record. Mean patient age was The study was approved by the hospital’s Ethics Committee.