Objective: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of the Alvarado score for the de Alvarado como recurso clínico para el diagnóstico de la apendicitis aguda. de escalas diagnósticas de apendicitis aguda: Alvarado, RIPASA y AIR and has better accuracy for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Introducción: la apendicitis aguda constituye la primera causa de Los mejores valores diagnósticos de la enfermedad para la escala fueron aquellos con.

Author: JoJojinn Vudorg
Country: Mozambique
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Personal Growth
Published (Last): 21 June 2005
Pages: 189
PDF File Size: 6.39 Mb
ePub File Size: 19.85 Mb
ISBN: 795-8-94143-282-4
Downloads: 76233
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Maull

Later, we calculated the LR criterlos our results and for each of the previous similar reports Table 4. ROC curves obtained by calculating the results of both scores. The distribution of AA cases was similar to other reports, predominantly affecting patients between the second and fourth decades of life.

Se continuar a navegar, consideramos que aceita o seu uso.


Postoperative complications occurred in albarado patients 4 seromas, 2 infections of the surgical site and 2 residual abscesses. Mean patient age was You can change the settings or obtain more information by clicking here.

Within the studies comparing both systems Table 4Chong et al. Continuing navigation will be considered as acceptance of this use.

Topics Discussed in This Paper. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the Alvarado and RIPASA scores in the clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis and to correlate with the histopathological results. In the study by Golden et al.


Regarding the operation, all appendectomies were open surgeries; in 69, the McBurney-type incision was used, while 31 were performed with a midline laparotomy. The pathology report was obtained and the efficacy of both scores for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis was compared. Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: The further away from 1, the better the test is to differentiate between sick and healthy subjects.

Results One hundred patients were included. The differences observed between both scores were not statistically significant. In hospitals like ours, the diagnosis of AA relies greatly on the clinical evaluation performed by surgeons.

There was a problem providing the content you requested

The higher the score obtained, the greater the probability that the patient has Apendiciyis. Likewise, we determined that the cut-off point for the Alvarado score can be as low as 6. Contact Us Send Feedback. The Alvarado score published in is an assessment chart Table 1whose sum gives a maximum of 10 points with a higher probability that the patient has AA.

Emerg Med J, 33pp. The clinical and economic correlates of misdiagnosed appendicitis nationwide analysis. The purpose of our study was to compare the ability of two clinical scoring systems, the Alvarado and the RIPASA scores, to diagnose or rule out appendicitis since computed tomography, ultrasound and apendixitis have not been able to reduce the percentage of diagnostic error.

KanumbaJoseph B. Our research assessed the utility of such scales in the population of the eastern region of the country, and greater sensitivity and specificity were found with the RIPASA score. Si continua navegando, consideramos que acepta su uso.


APENDICITIS by Gustavo Rondon on Prezi

Predicting Survival in Geriatric Trauma Patients: Afterwards, we calculated the likelihood ratio. Comparison of appendicitis clinical scoring systems with physician-determined likelihood of appendicitis Research Forum Abstract Application of alvarado scoring system in diagnosis of acute crierios.

A new adult appendicitis score improves diagnostic accuracy of acute appendicitis – a prospective study Henna E. The RIPASA system has 18 variables divided into 4 groups data, signs, alarado and laboratory studies giving them a value of 0. Singapore Med J, 52pp. The purpose of this study was to apply both scales in the emergency department in cases of patients with presumptive diagnosis of AA and to compare these with the pathology reports after appendectomy, thereby comparing the efficacy, sensitivity and specificity of the Alvarado and RIPASA scores in the diagnosis of AA at a tertiary hospital serving the population of eastern Mexico.

The result consists of the sum of the values, with a maximum zlvarado of