Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Alvarado 1986
Alvarado 1986
We conducted a retrospective study of 305 patients hospitalized with ab- Alfredo Alvarado, MD
dominal pain suggestive of acute appendicitis. Signs, symptoms, and labora- Plantation, Florida
tory findings were analyzed for specificity, sensitivity, predictive value, and
joint probability~ The total joint probability, the sum of a true-positive and a From the Department of Surgery,
true-negative result, was chosen as a diagnostic weight indicative of the ac- Plantation General Hospital and Humana
curacy of the test. Eight predictive factors were found to be useful in making Hospital Bennett, Plantation, Florida.
the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Their importance, according to their di-
agnostic weight, was determined as follows: localized tenderness in the Received for publication April 5, 1985.
right lower quadrant, leukocytosis, migration of pain, shift to the left, tem- Revision received September 11, 1985.
perature elevation, nausea-vomiting, anorexia-acetone, and direct rebotmd Accepted for publication November 11,
1985.
pain. Based on this weight, we devised a practical diagnostic score that may
help in interpreting the confusing picture of acute appendicitis. [Alvarado A:
A practical score for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Ann Emerg Address for reprints: Alfredo Alvarado,
MD, 4101 NW 4th Street, Suite 407,
Med May 1986;15:557-564.] Plantation, Florida 33317.
INTRODUCTION
Acute appendicitis is a common cause of abdominal pain in all ages. How-
ever, it is often a perplexing diagnostic problem during the early stages of the
disease. In many cases, usually during the prodromal phase, its clinical man-
ifestations may be vague and uncertain. Failure to make an early diagnosis is
a primary reason for the persistent rate of morbidity and mortality. 1-3 Perfora-
tion rates range from 4% 4 to 45%, s and death rates range from 0.17% 6 to
7.5%.z Mortality in children less than 2 years old is surprisingly high (20%). s
The number of unnecessary laparotomies, particularly in women, may be
as high as 45%. 1 The overall "negative" appendectomy rate ranges from
[4% 2,8 to 75%.9
Our goal is to be able to reduce the negative appendectomy rate without
increasing the risk of perforation. This might be accomplished by sharpening
our diagnostic acumen, especially during the early stages of the disease, be-
cause most of the perforations occur outside the hospital.2,3 A careful evalua-
tion of each patient may reduce the number of "healthy" appendices re-
moved.4t6, 8
MATERIALS A N D M E T H O D S
The records of 305 patients who were hospitalized from January 1975 to
December 1976 at Nazareth Hospital in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, with ab-
dominal pain (epigastric, periumbilical, diffuse, or in the right lower quad-
rant) suggestive of acute appendicitis were reviewed. Data, including age, sex,
duration of pain, symptoms, physical signs, and such laboratory findings as
white blood count (WBC), differential count, urinalysis, and pathology report,
were tabulated from existing clinical records.
RESULTS
Of 305 patients hospitalized, 51 (17%) were kept for observation and treat-
ed nonoperatively. They were discharged from the hospital with the diag-
nosis of possible acute mesenteric adenitis (29 patients, 57%} or nonspecific
gastroenteritis t22 patients, 43%).
Of the 305 patients, 254 (83%) had an appendectomy. Of these, 27 (11%)
did not have acute appendicitis. The remaining 227 (89%) did have acute
appendicitis at varying pathological stages (Table 1).
DISCUSSION
TABLE 7. Mnemonic for the diagnostic score of acute T h r e e s y m p t o m s (migration, an-
appendicitis: MANTRELS orexia, and nausea-vomiting), three
physical signs (tenderness, rebound
pain, and elevation of temperature),
Value and two laboratory findings (leuko-
Symptoms Migration 1 cytosis and shift to the left) appear to
Anorexia-acetone 1 be useful in the diagnosis of acute
appendicitis. If we assign a small
Nausea-vomiting 1
n u m b e r to the diagnostic weight of
Signs Tenderness in right lower quadrant 2 each indicant (Table 4), we obtain a
Rebound pain 1 workable score that can be used in
Elevation of temperature 1 practice (Table 7).
If we assign a value of 2 to the more
Laboratory I..eukocytosis 2 important elements (tenderness, leu-
Shift to the left 1 kocytosis) and a value of 1 to the re-
Total score 10 maining elements, we reach a total,
perfect score of 10. A score of 5 or 6 is
c o m p a t i b l e w i t h the d i a g n o s i s of
acute appendicitis. A score of 7 or 8
indicates a probable appendicitis, and
TABLE 8. Mean score and sample standard deviation for different stages of a score of 9 or 10 indicates a very prob-
acute appendicitis able appendicitis.
This system does not give a 100%
Stage N ~ s certainty because there is the chance
of o v e r l a p p i n g of s y m p t o m s w i t h
Simple 108 7.40 1.49 other diseases. There is no sign, symp-
Suppurative 67 7.92 1.66 tom, or laboratory test that is 100%
Gangrenous 15 7.73 0.96 reliable in the diagnosis of acute ap-
pendicitis (Figure 2). This test should
Perforated 37 8.21 1.45 have a diagnostic weight of 1.0; how-
ever, we can use the diagnostic score
as a guide to decide if the patient
one to 12 days, with a m e a n of 2.6 < .001)(Table 6). needs observation or surgery. A pa-
days; this was longer than pain dura- Clinical and l a b o r a t o r y findings tient with a score of 5 or 6 may be
tion in acute appendicitis (1.5 days) (P were m u c h less s e n s i t i v e t h a n in observed; a patient with a score of 7 or
15:5May 1986 Annals of Emergency Medicine 561/83
A C U T E APPENDICITIS
Alvarado
Certain s y m p t o m s and p h y s i c a l 43
signs are not always easy to elucidate, ::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::
there is any question about the diag-
nosis, more physical e x a m i n a t i o n s
and laboratory tests should be per- ::::::::
iiiii iiiii[iiiii
need laparotomy.
The diagnosis of acute appendicitis iiiiiJiiii
is more difficult in w o m e n because of
the presence of gynecological disor- I J
ders. In these cases a pelvic examina- 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10
tion is essential because it can reveal
the missing information. A rectal ex- Score
amination does not appear to be a reli-
able element in the diagnosis of acute
appendicitis because of its low diag-
nostic weight.Ls,7,8
1
liiiiiiiiiiiliiiiiiIiiiiilliiiiii
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Score
lated for each of the diagnostic in-
dicants. The highest number (48.08)
corresponded to migration of pain anorexia-acetone (18.27), and rebound chi-square for e l e v a t i o n of tem-
followed by leukocytosis (33.79), ten- pain (17.43). All of these numbers were perature was 10.23 (P < .01). The
demess (27.91), shift to the left (26.90), statistically significant (P < .001). The lowest figures corresponded to nausea-
84/562 Annals of Emergency Medicine 15:5 May 1986
6O I I I
56
31
30 :::::::::
J ::::::::: ...... ::,
::,:x::: :::::::::
I:ii!i!Ei [i!!i~i[!
:x:::::: :::::::::
!![iii:!! ]~iii!!]] 18
Simple ::':::-:: : : x : : : :
n = 108 15 iii:ii!ii ii~iiiill ~i~ii~il;il
d) . . . . . . . i:::x::::
= 7,40 I:.:~:. ~ iiiiiiiii ::ii~iiiii ..........!
s=±149 "[ ~ ! !?: :i!!! !~i!:?!!: : - - - : : l
ii!~ii[il~iiiiiill..........!
ii~iiiii?' !i:iiiiil ~
/
• :. :: . . . . . . .
30 30 ::::::::
I li!ii~irii,liiiiii!ii~i?~::i~:
27 • i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Score
2o
Suppurative
n =67 14 14
11 g 2 = 7.92
8 Xx\ o~
u~
7/. 5 - 7 " " 7 \\ 6
4
/" // 3 / °
~ *x xxx
I , ,J..,: J .....
I r I
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Score Score
7
vomiting (2.03) and rectal tenderness the subgroup of perforated-abscessed FIGURE 6. Polygon of frequency dis-
(0.29), with P values of less than .2 appendicitis (Table 8). For some rea- tribution in appendicitis and nonap-
and .5, respectively. son, however, in gangrenous appen- pendicitis.
The diagnostic score for acute ap- dicitis, the m e a n score is slightly
pendicitis is different than that for lower than the mean score for sup- FIGURE 7. Frequency distribution ac-
nonappendicitis (Figures 4 and 5). The purative appendicitis. This may reflect cording to the diagnostic score in sim-
mean score for acute appendicitis (n the famous "treacherous calm" of Die- ple and suppurative appendicitis.
= 227) is 7.71 (s + 1.53} and the mean ulafoy, in which the pain and tender-
score for nonappendicitis (n =-50} is ness subside temporarily during the
5.24 (s + 2.02}. gangrenous stage of the disease, lz 5.56. There was one case of gangre-
Using a polygon of frequency dis- The frequency distribution accord- nous appendicitis and another of per-
tribution (Figure 6) we can compare Lug to the score at different stages of forated a p p e n d i c i t i s w i t h n o r m a l
the diagnostic score for acute appen- acute appendicitis (Figures 7 and 8) WBC, but the scores were 7 and 6, re-
dicitis with that for nonappendicitis. shows t h a t in s u p p u r a t i v e appen- spectively. Four patients had acute ap-
If we choose a decision cutoff point of dicitis, the h i s t o g r a m is m a r k e d l y pendicitis with normal WBC and a
6, (either to operate for appendicitis or skewed to the right, indicating that at score of 4, but they were in the early
observe the patient) we will have 16 this stage we will have the m a x i m u m stages of the disease.
potential perforations (5.8%) and 24 constellation of signs and symptoms. One case of subacute appendicitis
unnecessary operations {8.7% }. If we was associated with mesenteric ade-
choose a cutoff point of 5, the poten- Application of the nitis. The patient had tenderness in
tial perforations drop to 8 (2.9%), but Diagnostic Score the right lower quadrant, but his diag-
the unnecessary operations rise to 31 In the group of patients with acute nostic score was 4. Retrospectively,
111.2%). The diagnostic score is flexi- appendicitis, 17 had a normal WBC; perhaps an unnecessary laparotomy
ble enough to allow for making the four of these patients had a shift to could have been prevented. There was
decision on an individual basis. the left. Tenderness was present in all another case of appendiceal fibrosis
The mean score increases in rela- patients, and migration of the pain that justified laparotomy because the
tion to the stage of the disease, from was found in 14. The diagnostic score diagnostic score was 9. One patient
7.40 in simple appendicitis to 8.21 in ranged from 4 to 7, with an average of with acute pancreatitis and periappen-
15:5 May 1986 Annals of Emergency Medicine 563/85
ACUTE APPENDICITIS
AIvarado