Impact of computed tomography of the abdomen on clinical outcomes in patients with acute right lower quadrant pain: a meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Clinical evaluation alone is still considered adequate by many clinicians who treat patients with appendicitis. The impact of computed tomography (CT) on clinical outcomes remains unclear, and there is no consensus regarding the appropriate use of CT in these patients. We sought to evaluate the impact of abdominal CT on the clinical outcomes of patients presenting with suspected appendicitis.


METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify studies that examined clinical outcomes related to the use of abdominal CT in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Inclusion criteria were studies of adult patients with suspected appendicitis that evaluated the impact of abdominal CT on negative appendectomy rates, perforation rates or time to surgery. Two independent investigators reviewed all titles and abstracts and extracted data from 28 full-text articles. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.0.10 software.


RESULTS
The negative appendectomy rate was 8.7% when using CT compared with 16.7% when using clinical evaluation alone (p < 0.001). There was also a significantly lower negative appendectomy rate during the CT era compared with the pre-CT era (10.0% v. 21.5%, p < 0.001). Time to surgery was evaluated in 10 of the 28 studies, 5 of which demonstrated a significant increase in the time to surgery with the use of CT. Appendiceal perforation rates were unchanged by the use of CT (23.4% in the CT group v. 16.7% in the clinical evaluation group, p = 0.15). Similarly, the perforation rate during the CT era was not significantly different than that during the pre-CT era (20.0% v. 19.6%, p = 0.74).


CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that the use of preoperative abdominal CT is associated with lower negative appendectomy rates. The use of CT in the absence of an expedited imaging protocol may delay surgery, but this delay is not associated with increased appendiceal perforation rates. Routine CT in all patients presenting with suspected appendicitis could reduce the rate of unnecessary surgery without increasing morbidity.
Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC.
Susan
S
Krajewski
Jacqueline
J
Brown
P Terry
PT
Phang
Manoj
M
Raval
Carl J
CJ
Brown
D015746:Abdominal Pain / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D000328:Adult; D001062:Appendectomy / Q000379:methods / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D001064:Appendicitis / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000601:surgery; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D010808:Physical Examination / Q000379:methods; D011300:Preoperative Care / Q000379:methods; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods*; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D019564:Unnecessary Procedures / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*
Acad Emerg Med. 2003 Aug;10(8):823-9
12896881
Radiology. 1999 Nov;213(2):341-6
10551210
Am J Emerg Med. 2007 Jun;25(5):489-93
17543650
Am J Surg. 2000 May;179(5):379-81
10930484
Arch Surg. 1998 Apr;133(4):373-6; discussion 377
9565116
Hepatogastroenterology. 2001 Jan-Feb;48(37):140-2
11268950
N Engl J Med. 1998 Jan 15;338(3):141-6
9428814
Am J Emerg Med. 2006 Jan;24(1):68-72
16338513
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 Jun;184(6):1802-8
15908534
Ann Chir. 2001 Jun;126(5):427-33
11447793
Ann Surg. 2006 Oct;244(4):498-504
16998358
Am J Surg. 2004 Dec;188(6):748-54
15619494
Am J Surg. 1993 Dec;166(6):660-4; discussion 664-5
8273845
Am Surg. 2005 Oct;71(10):803-8
16468523
Am J Emerg Med. 2006 Jan;24(1):43-7
16338508
Acad Emerg Med. 2007 Feb;14(2):117-22
17192450
Am Surg. 2006 Apr;72(4):326-9
16676857
J Am Coll Surg. 2006 Dec;203(6):849-56
17116553
Ann Surg. 1999 Mar;229(3):344-9
10077046
J Surg Res. 2002 Jul;106(1):131-6
12127818
Emerg Med Australas. 2004 Oct-Dec;16(5-6):410-6
15537403
Am J Surg. 2003 Mar;185(3):194-7
12620554
Arch Surg. 2001 Jun;136(6):670-5
11387006
Radiology. 2002 Oct;225(1):131-6
12354996
Ann Intern Med. 2004 Oct 5;141(7):537-46
15466771
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2003 Mar;18(2):126-30
12548414
Am J Emerg Med. 2001 Mar;19(2):109-12
11239252
Saudi Med J. 2006 Nov;27(11):1667-73
17106538
Am J Gastroenterol. 2000 May;95(5):1355-7
10811354
Am Surg. 2001 Nov;67(11):1017-21
11730216
N Engl J Med. 2007 Nov 29;357(22):2277-84
18046031
Am J Surg. 2003 Dec;186(6):682-4; discussion 684
14672779
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2003 Fall;4(3):231-9
14588157
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2003 Summer;4(2):213-8
12906722
Arch Surg. 2002 Jul;137(7):799-804; discussion 804
12093335
South Med J. 2005 Dec;98(12):1169-72
16440916
Am J Surg. 2000 Aug;180(2):133-6
11044529
Am Surg. 2003 Sep;69(9):727-31; discussion 731-2
14509318
J Am Coll Surg. 2005 Dec;201(6):933-9
16310698
Eur Radiol. 2003 Oct;13(10):2278-82
12845461
Am J Surg. 2000 Dec;180(6):450-4; discussion 454-5
11182396
Int J Qual Health Care. 2000 Feb;12(1):65-8
10733085
Arch Surg. 2002 Sep;137(9):995-8; discussion 999-1000
12215147
Ann Surg. 2006 Nov;244(5):656-60
17060754
Am J Surg. 1999 Dec;178(6):485-9
10670858
South Med J. 2005 Dec;98(12):1157-8
16440910
Am Surg. 2004 Oct;70(10):850-3
15529835
Arch Surg. 2001 May;136(5):556-62
11343547
Invest Radiol. 2006 Jul;41(7):579-85
16772851
J Am Coll Surg. 2006 Mar;202(3):401-6
16500243
Am Surg. 2002 Nov;68(11):1003-7
12455796
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999 May;172(5):1447-8
10227536
Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Dec;102(6):1404-9
14662234
Am J Gastroenterol. 1998 May;93(5):768-71
9625125