+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access



      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          RESÚMEN: Introducción y Objetivo: La apendicitis aguda es una de las patologías quirúrgicas de emergencia frecuente, el diagnóstico es principalmente clínico y en caso de ser tardío tiene alto riesgo de complicaciones. El presente estudio busca ver la Utilidad diagnostica de los criterios de Alvarado para apendicitis aguda en el Instituto Gastroenterológico Boliviano Japonés - La Paz durante el año 2019. Material y Métodos: Se realizó un estudio prospectivo, descriptivo de corte transversal, en el IGBJ - La Paz, se desarrolló un cuestionario para una entrevista semiestructurada a pacientes internados con sospecha de apendicitis aguda. Resultados: El estudio reunió 54 pacientes, de los cuales 64.8% varones y 35.2% varones. La prueba para diagnosticar apendicitis aguda con un valor mayor a 7, tuvo una sensibilidad de 90% y especificidad es de 50% por lo que no se permite descartar una apendicitis ya que el 50% es un valor bajo, con un valor predictivo positivo de 96% y valor predictivo negativo de 29%, al realizar un corte en 9 o más para diagnóstico de apendicitis aguda complicada tuvo una sensibilidad de 63% y especificidad de 67%, el valor predictivo positivo de 81%, valor predictivo negativo de 43%. Conclusiones: Concluimos que los Criterios de Alvarado es una herramienta útil para el diagnóstico de casos de apendicitis complicada; pero no todas las variables nos sirven para el diagnóstico, las más representativas son el dolor en fosa iliaca derecha y rebote por lo tanto se recomienda el uso de la escala en los servicios de urgencias.

          Translated abstract

          ABSTRACT: Introduction and Objective: Acute appendicitis is one of the frequent emergency surgical pathologies, the diagnosis is mainly clinical and if it is late it has a high risk of complications. The present study seeks to see the diagnostic utility of the Alvarado criteria for acute appendicitis at the Japanese Bolivian Gastroenterological Institute- La Paz during the year 2019. Material and Methods: A prospective, descriptive cross-sectional study was carried out at the IGBJ - La Paz, a questionnaire was developed for a semi- structured interview with inpatients with suspected acute appendicitis. Results: The study included 54 patients, of whom 64.8% were men and 35.2% were men. The test for acute appendicitis with a value greater than 7 had a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 50%, so appendicitis cannot be ruled out since 50% is a low value, with a positive predictive value of 96% and negative predictive value of 29%, when making a cut of 9 or more for diagnosis of complicated acute appendicitis had a sensitivity of 63% and specificity of 67%, positive predictive value of 81%, negative predictive value of 43%. Conclusions: We conclude that the Alvarado Criteria is a useful tool for the diagnosis of cases of complicated appendicitis; but not all variables are useful for diagnosis, the most representative are pain in the right iliac fossa and rebound, therefore the use of the scale is recommended in emergency services.

          Related collections

          Most cited references13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis: 2020 update of the WSES Jerusalem guidelines

          Background and aims Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is still challenging and some controversies on its management are still present among different settings and practice patterns worldwide. In July 2015, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) organized in Jerusalem the first consensus conference on the diagnosis and treatment of AA in adult patients with the intention of producing evidence-based guidelines. An updated consensus conference took place in Nijemegen in June 2019 and the guidelines have now been updated in order to provide evidence-based statements and recommendations in keeping with varying clinical practice: use of clinical scores and imaging in diagnosing AA, indications and timing for surgery, use of non-operative management and antibiotics, laparoscopy and surgical techniques, intra-operative scoring, and peri-operative antibiotic therapy. Methods This executive manuscript summarizes the WSES guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AA. Literature search has been updated up to 2019 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. The statements were voted, eventually modified, and finally approved by the participants to the consensus conference and by the board of co-authors, using a Delphi methodology for voting whenever there was controversy on a statement or a recommendation. Several tables highlighting the research topics and questions, search syntaxes, and the statements and the WSES evidence-based recommendations are provided. Finally, two different practical clinical algorithms are provided in the form of a flow chart for both adults and pediatric (< 16 years old) patients. Conclusions The 2020 WSES guidelines on AA aim to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) non-operative management for uncomplicated AA, (3) timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, (4) surgical treatment, (5) intra-operative grading of AA, (6) ,management of perforated AA with phlegmon or abscess, and (7) peri-operative antibiotic therapy.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Disconnect between incidence of nonperforated and perforated appendicitis: implications for pathophysiology and management.

            Appendicitis has been declining in frequency for several decades. During the past 10 years, its preoperative diagnosis has been made more reliable by improved computed tomography (CT) imaging. Thresholds for surgical exploration have been lowered by the increased availability of laparoscopic exploration. These innovations should influence the number of appendectomies performed in the United States. We analyzed nationwide hospital discharge data to study the secular trends in appendicitis and appendectomy rates. All appendicitis and appendiceal operations reported to the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS) 1970-2004 were classified as perforated, nonperforated, negative, and incidental appendectomies and analyzed over time and by various demographic measures. Secular trends in the population-based incidence rates of nonperforated and perforated appendicitis and negative and incidental appendectomy were examined. Nonperforated appendicitis rates decreased between 1970 and 1995 but increased thereafter. The 25-year decreasing trend was accounted for almost entirely by a decreasing incidence in the 10-19 year age group. The rise after 1995 occurred in all age groups above 5 years and paralleled increasing rates of CT imaging and laparoscopic surgery on the appendix. Since 1995 the negative appendectomy rate has been falling, especially in women, and incidental appendectomies, frequent in prior decades, have been rarely performed. Despite these large changes, the rate of perforated appendicitis has increased steadily over the same period. Although perforated and nonperforated appendicitis rates were correlated in men, they were not significantly correlated in women nor were there significant negative correlations between perforated and negative appendectomy rates. The 25-year decline in nonperforated appendicitis and the recent increase in appendectomies coincident with more frequent use of CT imaging and laparoscopic appendectomies did not result in expected decreases in perforation rates. Similarly, time series analysis did not find a significant negative relationship between negative appendectomy and perforation rates. This disconnection of trends suggests that perforated and nonperforated appendicitis may have different pathophysiologies and that nonoperative management with antibiotic therapy may be appropriate for some initially nonperforated cases. Further efforts should be directed at identifying preoperative characteristics associated with nonperforating appendicitis that may eventually allow surgeons to defer operation for those cases of nonperforating appendicitis that have a low perforation risk.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              WSES Jerusalem guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis

              Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common cause of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is challenging; a variable combination of clinical signs and symptoms has been used together with laboratory findings in several scoring systems proposed for suggesting the probability of AA and the possible subsequent management pathway. The role of imaging in the diagnosis of AA is still debated, with variable use of US, CT and MRI in different settings worldwide. Up to date, comprehensive clinical guidelines for diagnosis and management of AA have never been issued. In July 2015, during the 3rd World Congress of the WSES, held in Jerusalem (Israel), a panel of experts including an Organizational Committee and Scientific Committee and Scientific Secretariat, participated to a Consensus Conference where eight panelists presented a number of statements developed for each of the eight main questions about diagnosis and management of AA. The statements were then voted, eventually modified and finally approved by the participants to The Consensus Conference and lately by the board of co-authors. The current paper is reporting the definitive Guidelines Statements on each of the following topics: 1) Diagnostic efficiency of clinical scoring systems, 2) Role of Imaging, 3) Non-operative treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, 4) Timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, 5) Surgical treatment 6) Scoring systems for intra-operative grading of appendicitis and their clinical usefulness 7) Non-surgical treatment for complicated appendicitis: abscess or phlegmon 8) Pre-operative and post-operative antibiotics.

                Author and article information

                Revista Médica La Paz
                Rev. Méd. La Paz
                Colegio Médico de La Paz (La Paz, , Bolivia )
                : 28
                : 1
                : 33-41
                [1] Ciudad de El Alto orgnameHospital Municipal Modelo Corea Bolivia
                S1726-89582022000100033 S1726-8958(22)02800100033

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

                : 15 March 2022
                : 31 May 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 13, Pages: 9

                SciELO Bolivia

                ARTÍCULO ORIGINAL

                predictive Value of Tests,Appendicitis,Apendicitis,acute disease.,enfermedad aguda.,valor predictivo de las pruebas


                Comment on this article