Show simple item record

Computed Tomography With Intravenous Contrast Alone: The Role of Intra‐abdominal Fat on the Ability to Visualize the Normal Appendix in Children

dc.contributor.authorGarcia, Madelynen_US
dc.contributor.authorTaylor, Georgeen_US
dc.contributor.authorBabcock, Lynnen_US
dc.contributor.authorDillman, Jonathan R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorIqbal, Vaseemen_US
dc.contributor.authorQuijano, Carla V.en_US
dc.contributor.authorWootton‐gorges, Sandra L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorAdelgais, Kathleenen_US
dc.contributor.authorAnupindi, Sudha A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSonavane, Sushilen_US
dc.contributor.authorJoshi, Aparnaen_US
dc.contributor.authorVeeramani, Murugusundaramen_US
dc.contributor.authorAtabaki, Shireen M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMonroe, David J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBlumberg, Stephen J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorRuzal‐shapiro, Carrieen_US
dc.contributor.authorCook, Lawrence J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorDayan, Peter S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCourtney, D. Marken_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-09-04T17:18:44Z
dc.date.available2014-10-06T19:17:43Zen_US
dc.date.issued2013-08en_US
dc.identifier.citationGarcia, Madelyn; Taylor, George; Babcock, Lynn; Dillman, Jonathan R.; Iqbal, Vaseem; Quijano, Carla V.; Wootton‐gorges, Sandra L. ; Adelgais, Kathleen; Anupindi, Sudha A.; Sonavane, Sushil; Joshi, Aparna; Veeramani, Murugusundaram; Atabaki, Shireen M.; Monroe, David J.; Blumberg, Stephen J.; Ruzal‐shapiro, Carrie ; Cook, Lawrence J.; Dayan, Peter S.; Courtney, D. Mark (2013). "Computed Tomography With Intravenous Contrast Alone: The Role of Intraâ abdominal Fat on the Ability to Visualize the Normal Appendix in Children." Academic Emergency Medicine (8): 795-800. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/99695>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1069-6563en_US
dc.identifier.issn1553-2712en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/99695
dc.description.abstractBackground Computed tomography ( CT ) with enteric contrast is frequently used to evaluate children with suspected appendicitis. The use of CT with intravenous ( IV ) contrast alone ( CT IV ) may be sufficient, however, particularly in patients with adequate intra‐abdominal fat ( IAF ). Objectives The authors aimed 1) to determine the ability of radiologists to visualize the normal (nondiseased) appendix with CT IV in children and to assess whether IAF adequacy affects this ability and 2) to assess the association between IAF adequacy and patient characteristics. Methods This was a retrospective 16‐center study using a preexisting database of abdominal CT scans. Children 3 to 18 years who had CT IV scan and measured weights and for whom appendectomy history was known from medical record review were included. The sample was chosen based on age to yield a sample with and without adequate IAF . Radiologists at each center reread their site's CT IV scans to assess appendix visualization and IAF adequacy. IAF was categorized as “adequate” if there was any amount of fat completely surrounding the cecum and “inadequate” if otherwise. Results A total of 280 patients were included, with mean age of 10.6 years (range = 3.1 to 17.9 years). All 280 had no history of prior appendectomy; therefore, each patient had a presumed normal appendix. A total of 102 patients (36.4%) had adequate IAF . The proportion of normal appendices visualized with CT IV was 72.9% (95% confidence interval [ CI ] = 67.2% to 78.0%); the proportions were 89% (95% CI  = 81.5% to 94.5%) and 63% (95% CI  = 56.0% to 70.6%) in those with and without adequate IAF (95% CI for difference of proportions = 16% to 36%). Greater weight and older age were strongly associated with IAF adequacy (p < 0.001), with weight appearing to be a stronger predictor, particularly in females. Although statistically associated, there was noted overlap in the weights and ages of those with and without adequate IAF . Conclusions Protocols using CT with IV contrast alone to visualize the appendix can reasonably include weight, age, or both as considerations for determining when this approach is appropriate. However, although IAF will more frequently be adequate in older, heavier patients, highly accurate prediction of IAF adequacy appears challenging solely based on age and weight. Resumen Tomografía Computarizada Únicamente con Contraste Intravenoso: El Papel de la Grasa Intrabadominal en la Capacidad para Visualizar el Apéndice Normal en los Niños Introduction La tomografía computarizada ( TC ) con contraste entérico es usada frecuentemente para evaluar a los niños con sospecha de apendicitis. El uso de la TC únicamente con contraste intravenoso ( TC IV ) puede ser suficiente, especialmente en pacientes con adecuada grasa intrabdominal ( GIA ). Objetivos 1) Determinar la capacidad de los radiólogos para visualizar el apéndice normal (sin enfermedad) con TC IV en niños, y valorar si la cantidad de GIA afecta a esta capacidad; y 2) valorar la asociación entre la idoneidad de la GIA y las características del paciente. Metodología Estudio retrospectivo de 16 hospitales que utilizó una base de datos prexistente de TC abdominales. Se incluyó a los niños entre 3 y 18 años que tenían una TC IV , una medida del peso e historia de apendectomía conocida por la revisión de la historia clínica. La muestra se eligió en base a la edad con el fin de conseguir una muestra con y sin GIA adecuada. Los radiólogos de cada centro releyeron las TC IV de sus centros para valorar la visualización del apéndice y la adecuación de la GIA . La GIA se clasificó como “adecuada” si había cualquier cantidad de grasa completamente alrededor del ciego e “inadecuada” si era de otra manera. Resultados Se incluyeron 280 pacientes, con una media de edad de 10,6 años (rango 3,1 a 17,9 años). Ninguno tenía historia previa de apendectomía; por lo tanto todos los pacientes tuvieron un apéndice presumiblemente normal. Ciento dos pacientes (36,4%) tuvieron GIA adecuada. El porcentaje de apéndices normales visualizados con TC IV fue de 72,9% ( IC 95% = 67,2% a 78,0%); la proporción fue 89% ( IC 95% = 81,5% a 94,5%), y 63% ( IC 95% = 56,0% a 70,6%) en aquéllos con y sin GIA adecuada ( IC 95% para la diferencia de proporciones = 16% a 36%). El mayor peso y la mayor edad se asociaron fuertemente con la adecuación de la GIA (p < 0,001), y el peso resultó ser el mayor factor predictivo, especialmente en mujeres. Aunque se asoció estadísticamente, se vio un solapamiento en los pesos y edades de aquéllos con y sin GIA adecuada. Conclusiones Los protocolos que usan la TC IV para visualizar el apéndice pueden razonablemente incluir el peso, la edad, o ambas como consideraciones para determinar cuándo esta aproximación es apropiada. Sin embargo, aunque la cantidad de GIA será frecuentemente más apropiada en los pacientes más mayores y de mayor peso, la predicción certera de adecuación de GIA es altamente desafiante si se basa sólo en la edad y el peso.en_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.titleComputed Tomography With Intravenous Contrast Alone: The Role of Intra‐abdominal Fat on the Ability to Visualize the Normal Appendix in Childrenen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMedicine (General)en_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.identifier.pmid24033622en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/99695/1/acem12185.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/acem.12185en_US
dc.identifier.sourceAcademic Emergency Medicineen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA, et al. Helical CT technique for the diagnosis of appendicitis: prospective evaluation of a focused appendix CT examination. Radiology. 1997; 202: 139 – 44.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuynh LN, Coughlin BF, Wolfe J, Blank F, Lee SY, Smithline HA. Patient encounter time intervals in the evaluation of emergency department patients requiring abdominopelvic CT: oral contrast versus no contrast. Emerg Radiol. 2004; 10: 310 – 3.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChristopher FL, Lane MJ, Ward JA, Morgan JA. Unenhanced helical CT scanning of the abdomen and pelvis changes disposition of patients presenting to the emergency department with possible acute appendicitis. J Emerg Med. 2002; 23: 1 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePinto Leite N, Pereira JM, Cunha R, Pinto P, Sirlin C. CT evaluation of appendicitis and its complications: imaging techniques and key diagnostic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005; 185: 406 – 17.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCallahan MJ, Rodriguez DP, Taylor GA. CT of appendicitis in children. Radiology. 2002; 224: 325 – 32.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAcosta R, Crain EF, Goldman HS. CT can reduce hospitalization for observation in children with suspected appendicitis. Pediatr Radiol. 2005; 35: 495 – 500.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePena BM, Taylor GA, Lund DP, Mandl KD. Effect of computed tomography on patient management and costs in children with suspected appendicitis. Pediatrics. 1999; 104 ( 3 Pt 1 ): 440 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNikolaidis P, Hwang CM, Miller FH, Papanicolaou N. The nonvisualized appendix: incidence of acute appendicitis when secondary inflammatory changes are absent. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004; 183: 889 – 92.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGanguli S, Raptopoulos V, Komlos F, Siewert B, Kruskal JB. Right lower quadrant pain: value of the nonvisualized appendix in patients at multidetector CT. Radiology. 2006; 241: 175 – 80.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFriedland JA, Siegel MJ. CT appearance of acute appendicitis in childhood. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997; 168: 439 – 42.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChoi D, Park H, Lee YR, et al. The most useful findings for diagnosing appendicitis on contrast‐enhanced helical CT. Acta Radiol. 2003; 44: 574 – 82.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKim HC, Yang DM, Shin HP. Why can we not see a normal appendix on CT? An evaluation of the factors influencing nonvisualization of a normal appendix by 64‐slice MDCT. Clin Imaging. 2009; 33: 33 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLevine CD, Aizenstein O, Lehavi O, Blachar A. Why we miss the diagnosis of appendicitis on abdominal CT: evaluation of imaging features of appendicitis incorrectly diagnosed on CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005; 184: 855 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBenjaminov O, Atri M, Hamilton P, Rappaport D. Frequency of visualization and thickness of normal appendix at nonenhanced helical CT. Radiology. 2002; 225: 400 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGrayson DE, Wettlaufer JR, Dalrymple NC, Keesling CA. Appendiceal CT in pediatric patients: relationship of visualization to amount of peritoneal fat. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001; 176: 497 – 500.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBasak S, Nazarian LN, Wechsler RJ, et al. Is unenhanced CT sufficient for evaluation of acute abdominal pain? Clin Imaging. 2002; 26: 405 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHolmes JF, Lillis K, Monroe D, et al. for the PECARN. Identifying children at very low risk of clinically important blunt abdominal injuries. Ann Emerg Med. 2013 Jan 29. doi:pii: S0196‐0644(12)01743‐X. 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.11.009. [Epub ahead of print]en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKaiser S, Frenckner B, Jorulf HK. Suspected appendicitis in children: US and CT–a prospective randomized study. Radiology 2002; 223: 633 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKharbanda AB, Taylor GA, Bachur RG. Suspected appendicitis in children: rectal and intravenous contrast‐enhanced versus intravenous contrast‐enhanced CT. Radiology. 2007; 243: 520 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGarcia Pena BM, Mandl KD, Kraus SJ, et al. Ultrasonography and limited computed tomography in the diagnosis and management of appendicitis in children. JAMA. 1999; 282: 1041 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTaylor GA. Suspected appendicitis in children: in search of the single best diagnostic test. Radiology. 2004; 231: 293 – 5.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlloo J, Gerstle T, Shilyansky J, Ein SH. Appendicitis in children less than 3 years of age: a 28‐year review. Pediatr Surg Int. 2004; 19: 777 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSivit CJ, Siegel MJ, Applegate KE, Newman KD. When appendicitis is suspected in children. Radiographics. 2001; 21: 247 – 62.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.