Evaluation of a low-dose CT protocol with oral contrast for assessment of acute appendicitis.
The aim of this study was to evaluate a low-dose CT with oral contrast medium (LDCT) for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and compare its performance with standard-dose i.v. contrast-enhanced CT (standard CT) according to patients' BMIs. Eighty-six consecutive patients admitted with suspicion of acute appendicitis underwent LDCT (30 mAs), followed by standard CT (180 mAs). Both examinations were reviewed by two experienced radiologists for direct and indirect signs of appendicitis. Clinical and surgical follow-up was considered as the reference standard. Appendicitis was confirmed by surgery in 37 (43%) of the 86 patients. Twenty-nine (34%) patients eventually had an alternative discharge diagnosis to explain their abdominal pain. Clinical and biological follow-up was uneventful in 20 (23%) patients. LDCT and standard CT had the same sensitivity (100%, 33/33) and specificity (98%, 45/46) to diagnose appendicitis in patients with a body mass index (BMI) >or= 18.5. In slim patients (BMI<18.5), sensitivity to diagnose appendicitis was 50% (2/4) for LDCT and 100% (4/4) for standard CT, while specificity was identical for both techniques (67%, 2/3). LDCT may play a role in the diagnostic workup of patients with a BMI >or= 18.5.
Platon
Alexandra
A
Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Geneva, 24, rue Micheli-du-Crest, 1211 Geneva 14, Switzerland.
Jlassi
Helmi
H
Rutschmann
Olivier T
OT
Becker
Christoph D
CD
Verdun
Francis R
FR
Gervaz
Pascal
P
Poletti
Pierre-Alexandre
PA
D015746:Abdominal Pain; D000208:Acute Disease; D000284:Administration, Oral; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001064:Appendicitis / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D003287:Contrast Media / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011829:Radiation Dosage; D011859:Radiography; D011877:Radionuclide Imaging; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity
D003287:Contrast Media
Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Mar;93(3):417-21
10074991
J Am Coll Radiol. 2006 Feb;3(2):115-21
17412021
Clin Radiol. 2007 Jun;62(6):573-8
17467395
Radiology. 1994 Jan;190(1):31-5
8259423
Radiology. 2004 Jul;232(1):164-72
15155894
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993 Apr;160(4):763-6
8456661
Eur Radiol. 2005 Dec;15(12):2435-47
16132914
Radiology. 2006 Oct;241(1):83-94
16928974
Radiology. 2005 Aug;236(2):527-34
16040910
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 Jun;184(6):1802-8
15908534
Eur Radiol. 2002 Sep;12(9):2136-50
12195463
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998 Oct;171(4):997-1001
9762983
Int J Obes. 1985;9(2):147-53
4030199
Dis Colon Rectum. 2007 Aug;50(8):1223-9
17566826
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 Mar;184(3):855-9
15728609
Radiology. 1999 Nov;213(2):341-6
10551210
Urology. 2006 Jan;67(1):64-8
16413334
Eur Radiol. 2000;10(12):1886-93
11305565
Emerg Radiol. 2006 May;12(4):150-7
16738930
Radiology. 2001 Dec;221(3):747-53
11719671
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Apr;188(4):927-33
17377025
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2008;129(1-3):132-4
18469347
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997 Nov;169(5):1275-80
9353441
Radiology. 2000 May;215(2):337-48
10796905
Eur Radiol. 2002 Jun;12(6):1567-70
12042969
Eur Radiol. 2003 Oct;13(10):2278-82
12845461
Am J Surg. 2000 Dec;180(6):450-4; discussion 454-5
11182396
Radiology. 2001 Sep;220(3):683-90
11526267
Clin Imaging. 2005 Jul-Aug;29(4):255-8
15967316
Am J Surg. 1999 Dec;178(6):485-9
10670858
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 Aug;185(2):509-15
16037529
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006 Sep-Oct;30(5):758-64
16954924
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Feb;176(2):497-500
11159103
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1997 Sep-Oct;21(5):686-92
9294553
Radiology. 1997 Feb;202(2):363-6
9015058
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Apr;176(4):933-41
11264081
Eur Radiol. 2007 Aug;17(8):2055-61
17180324
Acta Radiol. 2005 Nov;46(7):756-63
16372698