Performance of an algorithm for diagnosing acute cholecystitis using clinical and sonographic parameters
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 8, 2025

Application of Laparoscopic Ultrasonography in Primary Choledochal Suture during Combined Two-lens Surgery
Published on: March 28, 2025
Maitray D Patel1, Andrew P Sill2, Nirvikar Dahiya2
1Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, 5777 E. Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ, 85054, USA. patel.maitray@mayo.edu.
Purpose:
Identify an algorithm using clinical and ultrasound (US) parameters with high diagnostic performance for acute cholecystitis.
Methods:
Consecutive emergency department (ED) patients from 4/1/2019 to 12/31/2019 were retrospectively reviewed to record non-US parameters and make US observations. Outcomes were categorized as either: (1) acute cholecystitis; or (2) negative acute cholecystitis. Pivot tables identified parameter combinations either not found with acute cholecystitis or with predictive value for acute cholecystitis to establish the algorithm. US Division radiologists finalized an US report prior to ED disposition without use of the algorithm. Radiologist impression and algorithm prediction for acute cholecystitis were categorized as either (1) acute cholecystitis; (2) negative acute cholecystitis; or (3) inconclusive.
Results:
Three hundred and sixty-six studies on 357 patients (mean age, 51 yrs ± 20 yrs; 215 women) met the inclusion criteria. 10.9% (40/366) of US studies had acute cholecystitis, 12.6% (46/366) had pathologically identified chronic cholecystitis without acute cholecystitis, and 76.5% (280/366) were negative acute cholecystitis. Algorithm compared to radiologist diagnostic performance was as follows: (1) sensitivity: 90.0% vs. 55.0%, p < 0.001; (2) augmented sensitivity (defined as when inconclusive categorization is considered consistent with acute cholecystitis): 100% vs. 85.0%, p < 0.001; (3) specificity: 93.6% vs. 94.8%, p = 0.50; (4) diagnostic rate (opposite of inconclusive rate): 96.4% vs. 93.2%, p = 0.04; (5) adverse outcome rate: 0.0% vs. 1.6%, p undefined.
Conclusion:
For acute cholecystitis, an algorithm using non-binary ultrasound and clinical assessments had higher sensitivity, higher diagnostic rate, and fewer adverse outcomes, than subspecialty radiologist impressions.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Ultrasound II: Endoscopic Ultrasound and FibroScan
Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS):
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...
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System I:Echocardiography
Indications: Echocardiography is utilized to diagnose heart failure, valve disorders, and myocardial infarction. It also assesses cardiac structures' size, shape, and motion,...
Endoscopic Procedures V: ERCP
Patient...

