scholarly journals A Comparative Study of Ripasa Score and Modified Alvardo Score in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis

Author(s):  
Malay Kumar Barman ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 1330
Author(s):  
Shahaji Chavan ◽  
Shubhi Bhatnagar ◽  
Mahendra Bendre ◽  
Nilesh Sinha

Background: Acute appendicitis despite being a common problem, remains a difficult diagnosis to establish. A delay to diagnose this condition as well as negative appendicectomies should be prevented. The above problems can be avoided by using scoring systems. This study aims to compare the efficacy of Alvarado score and RIPASA score in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.Methods: In this study, 100 cases of appendicitis were admitted. Alvarado and RIPASA scores were applied to all patients. The scores were compared with post-operative histopathology findings.Results: Alvarado score was positive in 75% cases and RIPASA score was present in 90% cases. Histologically, appendicitis was present in 99% cases.Conclusions: RIPASA score is more efficient in diagnosing acute appendicitis compared to Alvarado score.


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (80) ◽  
pp. 4318-4321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sinnet P. R ◽  
Peter Manoharan Chellappa ◽  
Santhosh Kumar ◽  
Ruthrendhra Ethirajulu ◽  
Shilpa Thambi

2021 ◽  
pp. 25-28
Author(s):  
M. Vijaya Kumar ◽  
Manasa Manasa

Acute appendicitis is the most common condition encountered in the Emergency department .Alvarado and Modied Alvarado scores are the most commonly used scoring system used for diagnosing acute appendicitis.,but its performance has been found to be poor in certain population . Hence our aim was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA and ALVARADO Scoring system and study and compare sensitivity, specicity and predictive values of these scoring systems. The study was conducted in Government district hospital Nandyal . We enrolled 176 patients who presented with RIF pain . Both RIPASA and ALVARADO were applied to them. Final diagnosis was conrmed either by CT scan, intra operative nding or post operative HPE report. Sensitivity,specicity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy was calculated both for RIPASA and ALVARADO. It was found that sensitivity and specicity of the RIPASA score in our study are 98.7% and 83.3%, respectively. PPV and NPV were 98.1% and 88.2% and sensitivity and specicity of the Alvardo score in our study are 94.3% and 83.3%, respectively. PPV and NPV were 98% and 62.5%.Diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA score and Alvarado score are 97% and 93% respectively. RIPASA is a more specic and accurate scoring system in our local population when compared to ALVARADO . It reduces the number of missed appendicitis cases and also convincingly lters out the group of patients that would need a CT scan for diagnosis (score 5-7.5 ) BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis is one of the most commonly dealt surgical emergencies, with a lifetime prevalence rate of approximately 1 one in seven. The incidence is 1.5–1.9 per 1,000 in the male and female population, and is approximately 1.4 times greater in men than in women. Despite being a common problem, it remains a difcult diagnosis to establish, particularly among the young, the elderly and females of reproductive age, where a host of other genitourinary and gynaecological inammatory conditions can present with signs and symptoms that are 2 similar to those of acute appendicitis. A delay in performing an appendectomy in order to improve its diagnostic accuracy increases the risk of appendicular perforation and peritonitis, which in turn increases morbidity and mortality. A variable combination of clinical signs and symptoms has been used together with laboratory ndings in several scoring systems proposed for suggesting the probability of Acute Appendicitis and the possible subsequent management pathway. The Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) and ALVARADO score are new diagnostic scoring systems developed for the diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis and has been shown to have signicantly higher sensitivity, specicity and diagnostic accuracy. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES PRIMARY OBJECT 1. To compare RIPASA Scoring system and ALVARADO Scoring system in terms of diagnostic accuracy in Acute Appendicitis. 2. To study and compare sensitivity, specicity and predictive values of above scoring systems. SECONDARY OBJECT 1. To study the rate of negative appendicectomy based on above scoring systems. CONCLUSION: The RIPASA score is a simple scoring system with high sensitivity and specicity for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. The 14 clinical parameters are all present in a good clinical history and examination and can be easily and quickly applied. Therefore, a decision on the management can be made early. Although the RIPASA score was developed for the local population of Brunei, we believe that it should be applicable to other regions. The RIPASA score presents greater Diagnostic accuracy and Sensitivity and equal specicity as a diagnostic test compared to the Alvarado score and is helpful in making appropriate therapeutic decisions. In hospitals like ours, the diagnosis of AA relies greatly on the clinical evaluation performed by surgeons. An adequate clinical scoring system would avoid diagnostic errors, maintaining a satisfactory low rate of negative appendectomies by adequate patient stratication, while limiting patient exposure to ionizing radiation, since 21 there is an increased risk of developing cancer with computed tomography, particularly for the paediatric age group.


2018 ◽  
Vol 56 ◽  
pp. 307-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maximos Frountzas ◽  
Konstantinos Stergios ◽  
Dimitra Kopsini ◽  
Dimitrios Schizas ◽  
Konstantinos Kontzoglou ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 196-206
Author(s):  
Mohend A.N. Al-Shalah

Background: Laparoscopic appendectomy(LA) has gained a wide safe acceptance and effective method for treatment of acute appendicitis and can be considered as a gold standard. The aim of the study was to evaluate the results of LA performed with the use of different techniques. Method: Prospective randomized comparative study was carried out in a Babylon General Teaching Hospital. Patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis between December 2011 and December 2015 and agreed to do LA were included in this study. In Group A , the mesoappendix and the base of appendix is ligated using titanium clips while in group B ,the mesoappendix was cut with the application of monopolar diathermy very near to the appendix wall and the base of appendix is ligated using vicryle endoloop. In. Primary outcomes were assessed which include mortality ,intra and post-operative complication rate, reinterventions, and converted laparoscopic appendectomies to open .Secondary outcomes were time of hospitalization, duration of operation, wound infection and intra-abdominal abscesses formation rate, hospital charges. Result: A total of 284patients underwent LA. 146 (51.4%) of them ,LA were done by clipping of mesoappendix and base of appendix by titanium clips, while the other 138 (48.6%) of patients LA were done by using monapolar diathermy to the mesoappendix and base of appendix secured by vicryle endoloop. The overall mean age of all patients with appendectomy was (26.42±11.05) years old and (38.7%) of patients were aged between 20-30 years. (52.5%) of patients were males. The overall mean weight, height and BMI for patients with appendectomy were (74.29±12.14) kg, (1.68±0.09) m and (26.68±8.84) kg/m2, respectively. (45.4%) of patients were overweight. The overall mean duration of operation was (31.01±12.48) min and (68.7%) of patients spent less than 30 min operative time, meanwhile, the mean of hospitalization after operation was (22.11± 17.96) hours and (71.8%) of patients stayed less than 20 hours in hospital. Only (8.5%) of patients had complicated appendicitis and complication post-operation, while, (4.9%) of patients had complicated appendectomy. (45.1%) of operations’ cost were 450 US $. There were significant associations between type of appendectomy with duration, complicated operation and price of operation. Conclusion: Laparoscopic appendectomies can be considered a safe treatment of complicated and non complicated appendicitis. Application of monopolar diathermy very near to the wall of appendix to cauterize the small vessels of mesoappendix is useful and safe and considered costly effective and less complication rate than application of Titanium clips.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. 4378
Author(s):  
Ankur Varma ◽  
Aditi Varshney Varma ◽  
Jebin Joseph

Background: Acute appendicitis is a diagnostic dilemma for surgeons due to wide array of differential diagnosis and sometimes due to atypical presentation. Diagnosis using sonography, which is the most common modality, has a very low specificity and sensitivity. In such cases it puts a surgeon in dilemma especially in an emergency setting. The integration of clinical scores into the diagnostic process in acute appendicitis has been shown to improve decision making and reducing the negative appendectomy.Methods: This is a prospective observational study attempted to compare the efficiency of Alvarado and Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) score, in pre-operative diagnosis of acute appendicitis and to correlate these scores with histo-pathological diagnosis.100 cases satisfying inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected for study. Based on detailed history and thorough clinical examination, diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made.Results: Sensitivity for detecting acute appendicitis was found to be higher using RIPASA score. Negative appendectomy rate by RIPASA and Alvarado scoring systems were 11.5 and 19.2% meanwhile it was 12% with sonography.Conclusions: In the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, clinical scoring is a fast, simple, reliable, non-invasive, repeatable and safe diagnostic modality without extra expense and complications. This study shows RIPASA is a better scoring system than Alvarado in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.


1969 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 151-155
Author(s):  
Imtiaz Ahmad Khattak ◽  
Waleed Mabood ◽  
Muhammad Naeem ◽  
Sohaib Ali ◽  
Muhammad Adnan Khan Khattak

Background: Among acute emergencies, the most commonly occurring one is Acute appendicitis. Scoring systems have beendeveloped such as Alvarado and Modified Alvarado Scores. RIPASA Score has a higher sensitivity in the Asian population set.Thus, came about the plan of our examination to try things out with this new score and to check whether it undoubtedly performswellto the undertaking.Objectives To determine the sensitivity, specificity of the 16-point RIPASA scoring system in diagnosing suspected acuteappendicitis and its validationin correlation with histopathology.Material and Methods: The study was carried out in Khyber Teaching Hospital Peshawar Pakistan from January 2018 to June2018, Department of General Surgery. A total of 322 patients were included in the study. In ED, resident surgeons filled in theRIPASA Score proforma by taking a detailed history and doing a physical examination, and running labs along withultrasonography. The decisionto perform appendectomy was solelytaken bythe senior registrar which was the final decision andthe sample was sent forH/P later on.Results: Of the 322, patients who went through the surgery for acute appendicitis, 188 (58.4%) were male and 134 (41.6%) werefemale, 284(88.2%) had positive histopathology reports and 38 (11.8%) had a negative report. The sensitivity of the RIPASA Scoreat a cut-off value of 8.0 was 97.98%,with the specificity of 77%, and Positive Predictive value of 97.52%,and a Negative PredictiveValue of 86.3%.Conclusion: The clinical implication of RIPASA score is found to be more beneficial than the traditional Alvarado scoring system,thus could bringthe complications rates of appendectomy to significantly lowerfigures.Keywords: Acute Appendicitis,Alvarado Score,RIPASA Score,AsianPopulation, Sensitivity, Specificity


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document