Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2025

Systematic Scoring Analysis for Intestinal Inflammation in a Murine Dextran Sodium Sulfate-Induced Colitis Model
Published on: February 14, 2021
Development and Validation of the Scoring System of Appendicitis Severity 2.0
Jochem C G Scheijmans1, Wouter J Bom1, Umme Habiba Ghori1
1Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Importance:
When considering nonoperative treatment in a patient with acute appendicitis, it is crucial to accurately rule out complicated appendicitis. The Atema score, also referred to as the Scoring System of Appendicitis Severity (SAS), has been designed to differentiate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis but has not been prospectively externally validated.
Objective:
To externally validate the SAS and, in case of failure, to develop an improved SAS (2.0) for estimating the probability of complicated appendicitis.
Design, Setting, And Participants:
This prospective study included adult patients who underwent operations for suspected acute appendicitis at 11 hospitals in the Netherlands between January 2020 and August 2021.
Main Outcomes And Measures:
Appendicitis severity was predicted according to the SAS in 795 patients and its sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) for complicated appendicitis were calculated. Since the predefined targets of 95% for both were not met, the SAS 2.0 was developed using the same cohort. This clinical prediction model was developed with multivariable regression using clinical, biochemical, and imaging findings. The SAS 2.0 was externally validated in a temporal validation cohort consisting of 565 patients.
Results:
In total, 1360 patients were included, 463 of whom (34.5%) had complicated appendicitis. Validation of the SAS resulted in a sensitivity of 83.6% (95% CI, 78.8-87.6) and an NPV of 85.0% (95% CI, 80.6-88.8), meaning that the predefined targets were not achieved. Therefore, the SAS 2.0 was developed, internally validated (C statistic, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.89), and subsequently externally validated (C statistic, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.82-0.89). The SAS 2.0 was designed to calculate a patient's individual probability of having complicated appendicitis along with a 95% CI.
Conclusions And Relevance:
In this study, external validation of the SAS fell short in accurately distinguishing complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis. The newly developed and externally validated SAS 2.0 was able to assess an individual patient's probability of having complicated appendicitis with high accuracy in patients with acute appendicitis. Use of this patient-specific risk assessment tool can be helpful when considering and discussing nonoperative treatment of acute appendicitis with patients.
More Related Videos
15:49Flexible Colonoscopy in Mice to Evaluate the Severity of Colitis and Colorectal Tumors Using a Validated Endoscopic Scoring System
Published on: October 16, 2013
02:28Author Spotlight: Self-Assessment Protocol for Predicting Psoriatic Arthritis in Psoriasis Patients
Published on: March 1, 2024
Related Concept Videos
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...
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...
Assessment of the Abdomen II: Percussion
Percussion
Percussion is an essential...
Assessment of the Abdomen III: Palpation
Acute Pancreatitis II: Clinical Manifestations and Management
SBAR II: Application of SBAR
SBAR Report from a Nurse to a Health Care Provider
S: "Hello, Dr. Smith. This is Jane, RN, from the Med Surg unit. I am calling to tell you about Ms. White in Room 210, who is experiencing increased pain and redness at her incision site. Her recent...