Abdominal 64-MDCT for suspected appendicitis: the use of oral and IV contrast material versus IV contrast material only
- PMID: 19843742
- DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.2336
Abdominal 64-MDCT for suspected appendicitis: the use of oral and IV contrast material versus IV contrast material only
Abstract
Objective: The objective of our study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of IV contrast-enhanced 64-MDCT with and without the use of oral contrast material in diagnosing appendicitis in patients with abdominal pain.
Materials and methods: We conducted a randomized trial of a convenience sample of adult patients presenting to an urban academic emergency department with acute nontraumatic abdominal pain and clinical suspicion of appendicitis, diverticulitis, or small-bowel obstruction. Patients were enrolled between 8 am and 11 pm when research assistants were present. Consenting subjects were randomized into one of two groups: Group 1 subjects underwent 64-MDCT performed with oral and IV contrast media and group 2 subjects underwent 64-MDCT performed solely with IV contrast material. Three expert radiologists independently reviewed the CT examinations, evaluating for the presence of appendicitis. Each radiologist interpreted 202 examinations, ensuring that each examination was interpreted by two radiologists. Individual reader performance and a combined interpretation performance of the two readers assigned to each case were calculated. In cases of disagreement, the third reader was asked to deliver a tiebreaker interpretation to be used to calculate the combined reader performance. Final outcome was based on operative, clinical, and follow-up data. We compared radiologic diagnoses with clinical outcomes to calculate the diagnostic accuracy of CT in both groups.
Results: Of the 303 patients enrolled, 151 patients (50%) were randomized to group 1 and the remaining 152 (50%) were randomized to group 2. The combined reader performance for the diagnosis of appendicitis in group 1 was a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 76.8-100%) and specificity of 97.1% (95% CI, 92.7-99.2%). The performance in group 2 was a sensitivity of 100% (73.5-100%) and specificity of 97.1% (92.9-99.2%).
Conclusion: Patients presenting with nontraumatic abdominal pain imaged using 64-MDCT with isotropic reformations had similar characteristics for the diagnosis of appendicitis when IV contrast material alone was used and when oral and IV contrast media were used.
Similar articles
-
CT for Acute Nontraumatic Abdominal Pain-Is Oral Contrast Really Required?Acad Radiol. 2017 Jul;24(7):840-845. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2017.01.013. Epub 2017 Feb 23. Acad Radiol. 2017. PMID: 28237189
-
MDCT for suspected acute appendicitis in adults: impact of oral and IV contrast media at standard-dose and simulated low-dose techniques.AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Nov;193(5):1272-81. doi: 10.2214/AJR.08.1959. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009. PMID: 19843741 Clinical Trial.
-
Influence of body habitus and use of oral contrast on reader confidence in patients with suspected acute appendicitis using 64 MDCT.Emerg Radiol. 2010 Nov;17(6):445-53. doi: 10.1007/s10140-010-0875-x. Epub 2010 May 23. Emerg Radiol. 2010. PMID: 20496094 Clinical Trial.
-
MDCT of acute appendicitis: value of coronal reformations.Abdom Imaging. 2009 Jan-Feb;34(1):42-8. doi: 10.1007/s00261-008-9415-5. Abdom Imaging. 2009. PMID: 18493813 Review.
-
Is positive oral contrast material necessary for computed tomography in patients with suspected acute abdomen?Radiologia (Engl Ed). 2019 Mar-Apr;61(2):161-166. doi: 10.1016/j.rx.2018.10.006. Epub 2018 Nov 27. Radiologia (Engl Ed). 2019. PMID: 30497686 Review. English, Spanish.
Cited by
-
Use of positive oral contrast agents in abdominopelvic computed tomography for blunt abdominal injury: meta-analysis and systematic review.Eur Radiol. 2013 Sep;23(9):2513-21. doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-2860-8. Epub 2013 Apr 27. Eur Radiol. 2013. PMID: 23624596
-
Computed tomography for diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adults.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Nov 19;2019(11):CD009977. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009977.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. PMID: 31743429 Free PMC article.
-
Administration of enteric contrast material before abdominal CT in children: current practices and controversies.Pediatr Radiol. 2011 Apr;41(4):409-12. doi: 10.1007/s00247-010-1960-8. Epub 2011 Jan 11. Pediatr Radiol. 2011. PMID: 21221564 No abstract available.
-
The impact of introducing a no oral contrast abdominopelvic CT examination (NOCAPE) pathway on radiology turn around times, emergency department length of stay, and patient safety.Emerg Radiol. 2014 Dec;21(6):605-13. doi: 10.1007/s10140-014-1240-2. Epub 2014 Jun 6. Emerg Radiol. 2014. PMID: 24902657
-
A comparison of the accuracy of ultrasound and computed tomography in common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain.Eur Radiol. 2011 Jul;21(7):1535-45. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2087-5. Epub 2011 Mar 2. Eur Radiol. 2011. PMID: 21365197 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
