Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 25, 2026

Author Spotlight: Using Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Comprehensive Evaluation of the Abdominal Aorta
Published on: September 8, 2023
Use of Clinical Data to Predict Appendicitis in Patients with Equivocal US Findings
Brett S Athans1, Holly E Depinet1, Alexander J Towbin1
1From the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (B.S.A.); Division of Emergency Medicine (H.E.D.), Department of Radiology (A.J.T., A.T.T.), and Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology (B.Z.), Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Ave, MLC 5031, Cincinnati, OH 45229; and Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (Y.Z.).
Abstract:
Purpose To determine the incremental value of clinical data in patients with ultrasonographic (US) examinations that were interpreted as being equivocal for acute appendicitis. Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval, with a waiver of informed consent, was obtained for this analysis of clinical and imaging data in patients younger than 18 years old who were evaluated for acute appendicitis. Findings from US examinations were reported in a structured fashion, including two possible equivocal impressions. Clinical data were captured as Pediatric Appendicitis (PAS) or Alvarado scores and considered as categoric (high, intermediate, or low likelihood) and continuous variables to simulate stratification of equivocal US examinations to predict appendicitis. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to define score cutoffs, and logistic regression was used to assess individual clinical variables as predictors of appendicitis. Results The study population was made up of 776 patients (mean age, 11.7 years ± 3.7), with 429 (55.2%) girls. A total of 203 (26%) patients had appendicitis. US had a negative predictive value of 96.2% and a positive predictive value of 93.3% for depicting appendicitis, with 89 of 782 (11.4%) equivocal examinations. Categoric PAS and Alvarado scores were equivocal for 59.5% (53 of 89) and 50.6% (45 of 89) of equivocal US examinations, respectively. Categoric low- and high-likelihood PAS and Alvarado scores correctly predicted the presence of appendicitis in 61.1% (22 of 36) and 77.3% (34 of 44) of equivocal US examinations, respectively. As continuous variables, a PAS or Alvarado score of 5 or lower could be used to exclude appendicitis, with a 80.8% (21 of 26) and 90% (18 of 20) negative predictive value, respectively. Conclusion The study confirms the excellent performance of US for depicting pediatric appendicitis. In the subset of equivocal US examinations, a low clinical score (≤5) may be used to identify patients with a low likelihood of having appendicitis. (©) RSNA, 2016.
More Related Videos
05:50Author Spotlight: Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Gastric Content Assessment and Risk Stratification in Perioperative Care
Published on: September 22, 2023
08:51Murine Appendectomy Model of Chronic Colitis Associated Colorectal Cancer by Precise Localization of Caecal Patch
Published on: August 24, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Appendicitis-I: Introduction
Etiology: Appendicitis can arise from various causes, primarily rooted in the obstruction of the appendix lumen. Factors contributing to this obstruction include fecal accumulation, lymphoid hyperplasia and, in...
Appendicitis-II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Diagnosing Appendicitis
It requires a multifaceted approach, starting with a detailed physical examination to pinpoint the location and nature of the pain and identify any associated symptoms. Laboratory tests play a crucial role. A complete Blood Count (CBC) typically reveals leukocytosis (an increased number of...
Ultrasonography
During an ultrasonography procedure, a handheld device called...
Ultrasound II: Endoscopic Ultrasound and FibroScan
Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS):
Peptic Ulcer Disease III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Few clinical manifestations differentiate gastric ulcers from duodenal ulcers. Distinctions in the location, timing, and pain relief are crucial for healthcare providers in differentiating between gastric and duodenal ulcers during clinical assessments.
Imaging Studies II: Ultrasonography