• Diagn Interv Imaging · Nov 2019

    Comparative Study

    Unenhanced CT for clinical triage of elderly patients presenting to the emergency department with acute abdominal pain.

    • M Barat, A Paisant, P Calame, Y Purcell, M Lagadec, S Curac, M Zappa, V Vilgrain, and M Ronot.
    • Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val-de-Seine, AP-HP, Beaujon, 92110 Clichy, France. Electronic address: maxime.barat@aphp.fr.
    • Diagn Interv Imaging. 2019 Nov 1; 100 (11): 709-719.

    PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy and inter-reader agreement of unenhanced computed tomography (CT) to those of contrast-enhanced CT for triage of patients older than 75years admitted to emergency department (ED) with acute abdominal pain (AAP).Patients And MethodsTwo hundred and eight consecutive patients presenting with AAP to the ED who underwent CT with unenhanced and contrast-enhanced images were retrospectively included. There were 90 men and 118 women with a mean age of 85.4±4.9 (SD) (range: 75-101.4years). Three readers reviewed unenhanced CT images first, and then unenhanced and contrast-enhanced CT images as a single set. Diagnostic accuracy was compared to the standard of reference defined as the final diagnosis obtained after complete clinico-biological and radiological evaluation. Correctness of the working diagnosis proposed by the ED physician was evaluated. Intra- and inter-reader agreements were calculated using the kappa test and interclass correlation. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients requiring only conservative management and for those requiring intervention.ResultsDiagnostic accuracy ranged from 64% (95% CI: 62-66%) to 68% (95% CI: 66-70%) for unenhanced CT, and from 68% (95% CI: 66-70%) to 71% (95% CI: 69-73%) for both unenhanced and contrast-enhanced CT. Contrast-enhanced CT did not significantly improve the diagnostic accuracy (P=0.973-0.979). CT corrected the working diagnosis proposed by the ED physician in 59.1% (range: 58.1-60.0%) and 61.2% (range: 57.6-65.5%) of patients before and after contrast injection (P>0.05). Intra-observer agreement was moderate to substantial (k=0.513-0.711). Inter-reader agreement was substantial for unenhanced (kappa=0.745-0.789) and combined unenhanced and contrast-enhanced CT (kappa=0.745-0.799). Results were similar in subgroup analyses.ConclusionUnenhanced CT alone is accurate and associated with high degrees of inter-reader agreement for clinical triage of patients older than 75years with AAP in the emergency setting.Copyright © 2019 Société française de radiologie. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.