CRITERIOS DE ALVARADO PARA APENDICITIS AGUDA PDF

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: Gumi Nikozuru
Country: Ghana
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Relationship
Published (Last): 17 February 2016
Pages: 213
PDF File Size: 18.12 Mb
ePub File Size: 9.60 Mb
ISBN: 838-2-43851-754-7
Downloads: 72143
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Shagore

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.

Has misdiagnosis of appendicitis decreased over time? In conclusion, the RIPASA score presents greater accuracy and reliability as a diagnostic test compared to the Alvarado score and is helpful in making appropriate therapeutic decisions.

Within the studies comparing both systems Table 4Chong et al. Included for study were all cases treated with urgent appendectomy that had pathology results. Resultados Se incluyeron pacientes. In contrast, Nanjundaiah et al. We defined residual abscess as the presence of intra-abdominal purulent collections after the surgical treatment of AA.

With these data, ROC curves were generated to compare both scores. Emerg Med J, 33 agufa, pp. Showing of 15 references. Skip to search form Skip to main content. In the case of our study, the positive LR was 3. The body mass index is calculated by dividing weight in kilos by height squared in meters.

Se incluyeron pacientes. Comparison alvzrado appendicitis clinical scoring systems with physician-determined likelihood of appendicitis Research Forum Abstract One hundred patients were included.

The LR is a good parameter to decide when a diagnostic test should be performed. J Clin Diagn Res, 8pp.

  KILLING RAGE EAMON COLLINS PDF

The pathology report was obtained and the efficacy of both scores for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis was compared. The anatomopathological diagnosis constituted the Standard Gold critwrios this study. Rev Hosp Juarez Mex, 76pp. Ann Emerg Med, 64pp. Once the score is established, the diagnosis of appendicitis is classified as doubtful with less than 5 points, suggestive from 5 to 6 points, probable from 7 to 8 points, and very probable from 9 to 10 points.

Cir Gen, 32pp. Cir Xpendicitis, 34pp. Int J Surg, 10pp. The average positive LR of all the studies included in Table 4 for the Alvarado score was calculated at 3. En el surge la escala RIPASA mostrando alta sensibilidad y especificidad para poblaciones orientales, muy pocos son los estudios en poblaciones occidentales. Distribution of the Variables of the Patients Included. Several scoring systems have been developed for the early and equivocal diagnosis of this entity, one of these scales is the modified Alvarado, most used in the Western population; however, the RIPASA scale emerges in showing high sensitivity and specificity for Asian and Eastern populations, there are few studies in Western populations of this new scale.

Acute appendicitis NOS disorder Search for additional papers on this topic.

There was a problem providing the content you requested

Lancet,pp. The sensitivity and specificity of Modified Alvarado scale were Rawal Med J, 38pp. Upon applying the grading systems to the patients in the study, we found that the RIPASA score showed greater diagnostic certainty compared to the Alvarado score, with a sensitivity of The Alvarado score published alvaradl is an assessment chart Table 1whose sum gives a maximum of 10 points with a higher probability that the patient has AA.

Evaluation of alvarafo Alvarado score in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Update on the Management of Non-obstetric Acute Abdomen in The 2 different classifications, the Alvarado and the RIPASA scores, critterios applied to each of the patients by a resident doctor in surgery, without influencing the surgeon’s decision regarding surgical intervention.

  GRYPHON M130 MANUAL PDF

Some features of this site may not work without it.

APENDICITIS by Gustavo Rondon on Prezi

In all patients, complete analysis and urinalysis were requested; abdominal ultrasound was requested in 21 patients, in addition to abdominal X-rays, and in 66 patients only abdominal X-rays were requested, since the probable diagnosis of AA was basically clinical as was the decision to carry out the surgical intervention. One of the researchers was responsible for coding patient data, using numbers instead of names. Contact Us Send Feedback.

Later, we calculated the LR for our results and for each of the previous similar reports Table 4. Usefulness of the Alvarado scoring aguea with respect to age, sex and time of presentation, with regression analysis of individual parameters.

Critfrios further away from 1, the better the test is to differentiate between sick and alvatado subjects. To improve our services and products, we use “cookies” own or third parties authorized to show advertising related to client preferences through the analyses of navigation customer behavior.

J Evid Based Criteriow Healthc, 3pp. It is still a difficult diagnosis to make, especially in young persons, the elderly, and in reproductive-age women, in whom a series of inflammatory conditions can have signs and symptoms similar to those of acute appendicitis.