RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: In order to avoid delay in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and reduce the margin of error, the use of scales has been used. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the Alvarado and RIPASA scores in the clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis and to correlate with the histopathological results. METHODS: Prospective, longitudinal, analytical, comparative and observational study. Patients with abdominal pain syndrome suggestive of acute appendicitis and submitted to surgical intervention were included; the Alvarado and RIPASA scores were simultaneously applied. The pathology report was obtained and the efficacy of both scores for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis was compared. RESULTS: One hundred patients were included. It was shown that the RIPASA score demonstrated greater diagnostic accuracy compared to the Alvarado score, with sensitivity of 98,8% and specificity of 71,4% versus 90,7% and 64,3%, respectively. The RIPASA score showed an area under the curve of 0,88 and the Alvarado scale of 0,80. CONCLUSIONS: The RIPASA score is a more specific, convenient and accurate system than the Alvarado score for the Mexican population.
Assuntos
Apendicite/diagnóstico , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Doença Aguda , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Estudos Longitudinais , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Adulto JovemRESUMO
INTRODUCCIÓN: Con el fin de evitar retardo en el diagnóstico de apendicitis aguda y disminuir el margen de error, se ha recurrido a la aplicación de escalas. El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la eficacia de las escalas Alvarado y RIPASA en el diagnóstico clínico de apendicitis aguda y correlacionar con el resultado de patología. MÉTODOS: Estudio longitudinal prospectivo, analítico, comparativo. Se incluyeron pacientes con síndrome doloroso abdominal sugestivo de apendicitis aguda e intervenidos quirúrgicamente; se les aplicaron en forma simultánea las escalas de Alvarado y la RIPASA. Se obtuvo el reporte de patología y se comparó la eficacia de ambas escalas para el diagnóstico de apendicitis aguda. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 100 pacientes. La escala RIPASA demostró mayor certeza diagnóstica en comparación con la escala de Alvarado, con sensibilidad del 98,8% y especificidad del 71,4% versus 90,7% y 64,3%, respectivamente. La escala RIPASA mostró un área bajo la curva de 0,88 y la escala de Alvarado, de 0,80. CONCLUSIONES: La escala RIPASA es un sistema más específico, conveniente y certero que la escala de Alvarado para la población mexicana
INTRODUCTION: In order to avoid delay in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and reduce the margin of error, the use of scales has been used. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the Alvarado and RIPASA scores in the clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis and to correlate with the histopathological results. METHODS: Prospective, longitudinal, analytical, comparative and observational study. Patients with abdominal pain syndrome suggestive of acute appendicitis and submitted to surgical intervention were included; the Alvarado and RIPASA scores were simultaneously applied. The pathology report was obtained and the efficacy of both scores for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis was compared. RESULTS: One hundred patients were included. It was shown that the RIPASA score demonstrated greater diagnostic accuracy compared to the Alvarado score, with sensitivity of 98,8% and specificity of 71,4% versus 90,7% and 64,3%, respectively. The RIPASA score showed an area under the curve of 0,88 and the Alvarado scale of 0,80. CONCLUSIONS: The RIPASA score is a more specific, convenient and accurate system than the Alvarado score for the Mexican population
