Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2000 Feb;135(2):170-3; discussion 174.
doi: 10.1001/archsurg.135.2.170.

Accuracy of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of peritonitis compared with the clinical impression of the surgeon

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Accuracy of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of peritonitis compared with the clinical impression of the surgeon

S C Chen et al. Arch Surg. 2000 Feb.

Abstract

Hypothesis: Peritonitis is a well-known indication for surgery, but its preoperative cause usually is not established. We hypothesize that abdominal ultrasonography is superior to the clinical impression of the surgeon in detecting the cause of peritonitis.

Design: A prospective case series.

Setting: A major university hospital in Taiwan, Republic of China.

Patients and methods: One hundred two patients with a diagnosis of peritonitis admitted to the Department of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, were included in this study. All 102 patients underwent an abdominal ultrasonographic examination; and the ultrasonographic findings of these patients were classified into 2 categories: positive findings and normal screening results. The accuracy of clinical impression in detecting the cause of peritonitis was compared with the accuracy of abdominal ultrasonography.

Results: Ultrasonography and clinical impression accurately diagnosed the peritonitis in 85 (83.3%) and 52 (51.0%) of the patients, respectively. The difference between ultrasonography and clinical impression in the diagnosis of peritonitis was significant (P<.001). Among 45 patients without a preoperative clinical diagnosis, a diagnosis was made by ultrasonography for 32 (71%) of them. There were a total of 98 patients with positive ultrasonographic findings, and 4 patients had normal screening results. Of the 98 patients with positive ultrasonographic findings undergoing surgery, all had abdominal pathological characteristics. The 4 patients with normal screening results received nonoperative treatment.

Conclusions: Ultrasonography is a more sensitive technique than clinical judgment in diagnosing peritonitis. Ultrasonography may be a useful diagnosing modality in patients with peritonitis in whom the clinical cause is unclear.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources