Radiology Residents' Independent Diagnosis of Appendicitis Using 2-mSv Computed Tomography: A Secondary Analysis of a
Jungheum Cho1, Hae Young Kim2, Seungjae Lee3
1Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea.
Objective:
To compare the diagnostic performance and clinical outcomes of 2-mSv computed tomography (CT) and conventional-dose CT (CDCT), following radiology residents' interpretation of CT examinations for suspected appendicitis.
Materials And Methods:
Altogether, 3074 patients with suspected appendicitis aged 15-44 years (28 ± 9 years, 1672 females) from 20 hospitals were randomly assigned to the 2-mSv CT (n = 1535) or CDCT (n = 1539) groups in a pragmatic trial from December 2013 and August 2016. Overall, 107 radiology residents participated in the trial as readers in the form of daily practice after online training for 2-mSv CT. They made preliminary CT reports, which were later finalized by attending radiologists via addendum reports, for 640 and 657 patients in the 2-mSv CT and CDCT groups, respectively. We compared the diagnostic performance of the residents, discrepancies between preliminary and addendum reports, and clinical outcomes between the two groups.
Results:
Patient characteristics were similar between the 640 and 657 patients. Residents' diagnostic performance was not significantly different between the 2-mSv CT and CDCT groups, with a sensitivity of 96.0% and 97.1%, respectively (difference [95% confidence interval {CI}], -1.1% [-4.9%, 2.6%]; P = 0.69) and specificity of 93.2% and 93.1%, respectively (0.1% [-3.6%, 3.7%]; P > 0.99). The 2-mSv CT and CDCT groups did not significantly differ in discrepancies between the preliminary and addendum reports regarding the presence of appendicitis (3.3% vs. 5.2%; -1.9% [-4.2%, 0.4%]; P = 0.12) and alternative diagnosis (5.5% vs. 6.4%; -0.9% [-3.6%, 1.8%]; P = 0.56). The rates of perforated appendicitis (12.0% vs. 12.6%; -0.6% [-4.3%, 3.1%]; P = 0.81) and negative appendectomies (1.9% vs. 1.1%; 0.8% [-0.7%, 2.3%]; P = 0.33) were not significantly different between the two groups.
Conclusion:
Diagnostic performance and clinical outcomes were not significantly different between the 2-mSv CT and CDCT groups following radiology residents' CT readings for suspected appendicitis.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
01:29Appendicitis-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...
01:27Imaging Studies III: Computed Tomography
01:10Computed Tomography
The technique was invented in the 1970s and is based on the principle that as X-rays pass through the body, they are absorbed or reflected at different levels. In the technique, a patient lies on a motorized platform while a computerized axial tomography (CAT) scanner rotates...
01:22Appendicitis-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...
01:30Radiological Investigation I: X-ray and CT
01:26Imaging Studies III: Gastrointestinal Motility Studies and Virtual Colonoscopy
Radionuclide Testing
Radionuclide testing is a sophisticated medical technique for assessing gastrointestinal motility. It focuses on gastric emptying and colonic transit time. Radioactive markers track the movement of food through the digestive system, providing insights into gastrointestinal disorders.
In gastric emptying studies, a meal's liquid and...