Computed tomography (CT) scanning reduces the negative appendectomy rate however it exposes the patient to ionizing radiation. Ultrasound (US) does not carry this risk but may be nondiagnostic. We hypothesized that a clinical-US scoring system would improve diagnostic accuracy.METHODS
We conducted a retrospective review of all patients (age, >15 years) who presented through the emergency department with suspected appendicitis and underwent initial US. A US score was developed using odds ratios for appendicitis given appendiceal diameter, compressibility, hyperemia, free fluid, and focal or diffuse tenderness. The US score was then combined with the Alvarado score. Final diagnosis of appendicitis was assigned by pathology reports.RESULTS
Three hundred patients who underwent US as initial imaging were identified. Thirty-two patients with evident nonappendiceal pathology on US were excluded. In 114 (38%), the appendix was not visualized and partially visualized in 36 (12%). Fifty-seven (21.3%) had an appendectomy with 1 (1.7%) negative. Six nonvisualized appendicies underwent appendectomy, with no negative cases. Sensitivity and specificity for the sonographic score were 86% and 90%, respectively, at a score of 1.5. The combined score demonstrated 98% sensitivity and 82% specificity at 6.5, and 95% sensitivity, and 87% specificity at a score of 7.5. Sensitivity and specificity were confirmed by bootstrap resampling for validation. Area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for our new US score were similar to the ROC curve for the Alvarado score (91.9 and 91.1, p = 0.8). The combined US and Alvarado score yielded an area under the ROC curve of 97.1, significantly better than either score alone (p = 0.017 and p < 0.001, respectively).CONCLUSION
Our scoring system based entirely on US findings was highly sensitive and specific for appendicitis, and it significantly improved when combined with the Alvarado score. After prospective evaluation, the combined US-Alvarado score might replace the need for computed tomography imaging in a majority of patients.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Diagnostic Test, Level III.