Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the emergency surgeries. Confirming the diagnosis of acute appendicitis is challenging in those who present with atypical clinical features and non-specific physical findings. The newer techniques of ultrasonography (USG) and computed tomography (CT) are the promising diagnostics for evaluating patients with suspected acute appendicitis. We conducted a study to evaluate diagnostic performances of unenhanced focused CT in patients suspected of having acute appendicitis without a selection between typical and atypical clinical signs of acute appendicitis.

Patients and Methods: We enrolled (n=61) patients in a prospective observational study between 2008 and 2010 at the Department of Radio Diagnosis, Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram. Computed tomography (CT) examination was performed with four slice helical CT scanner (Asteion Toshiba) by means of a rapid thin-scanning technique.

Results: Out of 61 patients, 28 (45.9%) had acute appendicitis and 33 (54.1%) did not have appendicitis. CT diagnosed all 28 cases of appendicitis and 32 cases without appendicitis correctly. There was one false positive case.

Conclusion: Thus the present study, underscores that the unenhanced focused CT is accurate imaging modality in patients with suspected appendicitis.

Keywords: Acute appendicitis, computed tomography, radiology.

1. LIU CD, Mc Faden DW. Acute abdomen and appendix. In: Greenfeild LJ, editor. Surgery: Scientific principles and practice, Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven 1997. p. 1246-61.
2. Yeh B. Evidence-based emergency medicine/rational clinical examination abstract. Does this adult patient have appendicitis? Ann Emerg Med. 2008;52:301–3
3. Guss DA, Behling CA, Munassi D. Impact of abdominal helical computed tomography on the rate of negative appendicitis. J Emerg Med, 2008; 34:7–11.
4. Gwynn LK. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis: clinical assessment versus computed tomography evaluation. J Emerg Med. 2001; 21:119–23.
5. Ege G, Akman H, Sahin A, Bugra D, Kuzucw K. Diagnostic value of unenhanced helical CT in adult patients with suspected acute appendicitis. Br J Radiol. 2002; 75:721-5.
6. Pieper R, Kager L, Nasman P. Acute appendicitis: a clinical study of 1018 cases of emergency appendectomy. Acta Chir Scand. 1982; 148:51-62.
7. Flum DR, Morris A, Koepsell T, Dellinger EP. Has misdiagnosis of appendicitis decreased over time? A population-based analysis. JAMA, 2001; 286:1748-53.
8. Eldar S, Nash E, Sabo E, et al. Delay of surgery in acute appendicitis. Am J Surg. 1997; 173:194-8.
9. Pickuth D, Spielmann RP. Unenhanced spiral CT for evaluating acute appendicitis in daily routine: a prospective study. Hepatogastroenterol. 2001;48:140-2.
10. Peck J, Peck A, Peck C, Peck J. The clinical role of noncontrast helical computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Am J Surg. 2000; 180:133-6.
11. Wijetunga K, Tan BS, Rouse JC, Bigg-Wither GW, Doust BD. Diagnostic accuracy of focused appendiceal CT in clinically equivocal cases of acute appendicitis. Radiology. 2001; 221:747-53.
12. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA. Sensitivity and specificity of the individual CT signs of appendicitis: experience with 200 helical appendiceal CT examinations. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1997; 21:686-92.
13. Malone AJ, Wolf CR, Malmed AS, Melliere BF. Diagnosis of acute appendicitis: value of unenhanced CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993; 160:763-6.
14. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA, Mostafavi AA, Lawrason JN, McCabe CJ. Helical CT combined with contrast material administered only through the colon for imaging of suspected appendicitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997; 169:1275-80.
15. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA, et al. Helical CT technique for the diagnosis of appendicitis: prospective evaluation of a focused appendix CT examination. Radiology. 1997; 202:139-44.
16. Balthazar EJ, Megibow AJ, Siegel SE, Birnbaum BA. Appendicitis: prospective evaluation with high-resolution CT. Radiology. 1991; 180:21-4.
17. Balthazar EJ, Birnbaum BA, Yee J, Megibow AJ, Roshkow J, Gray C. Acute appendicitis: CT and US correlation in 100 patients. Radiology. 1994; 190:31-5.
18. Balthazar EJ, Rofsky NM, Zucker R. Appendicitis: the impact of computed tomography imaging on negative appendectomy and perforation rates. Am J Gastroenterol. 1998; 93:768-71.
19. Lane MJ, Katz DS, Ross BA, Clautice-Engle TL, Mindelzun RE, Jeffrey RB Jr. Unenhanced helical CT for suspected acute appendicitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997; 168:405-9.
20. Lane MJ, Liu DM, Huynh MD, Jeffrey RB Jr, Mindelzun RE, Katz DS. Unenhanced helical CT for suspected acute appendicitis: experience in 300 consecutive patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999; 172:114.
21. Schuler JG, Shortsleeve MJ, Goldenson RS, Perez-Rossello JM, Perlmutter RA, Thorsen A. Is there a role for abdominal computed tomographic scans in appendicitis? Arch Surg. 1998; 133:373-6.
22. Weltman DI, Yu J, Krumenaker J, Huang SM, Moh PP. Comparison of 5mm and 10mm CT sections in the same patient in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Radiology. 2000; 216:172-7.
23. Poortman P, Lohle PN, Schoemaker CM, et al. Comparison of CT and sonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a blinded prospective study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003; 181:1355-59.

Dr Prabhakaran Velayutham

Assistant Professor, Department of Radiology,

Mahatma Gandhi medical college & Research institute,

Pondicherry, India. 607402

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.