Clinical, laboratory and ultrasonographic criteria for reveaing inflammation of the appendix and its regression in children
- Authors: Blandinskij V.F.1, Sokolov S.V.2, Anfinogenov A.L.2, Kislova A.Y.2,1, Nizovceva A.A.3, Andreev A.I.2, Bereznjak I.A.2, Neznakomova D.A.1, Lugovkin A.V.2, Vinogradova A.A.2
-
Affiliations:
- Yaroslavl State Medical University
- Yaroslavl Children’s Clinical Hospital
- City Emergency Hospital
- Issue: Vol 27, No 4 (2023)
- Pages: 254-260
- Section: ORIGINAL STUDY
- Submitted: 14.12.2022
- Accepted: 21.10.2023
- Published: 24.10.2023
- URL: https://jps-nmp.ru/jour/article/view/746
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.55308/1560-9510-2023-27-4-254-260
- ID: 746
Cite item
Abstract
Introduction. Because of the numerous studies on a possible regression of inflammation in the cecum appendix, the question of finding reliable criteria for preoperative verification of inflammation and of assessing its dynamics in children is relevant.
Material and methods. In January 2017 – December 2021, case-histories of 92 children aged from 3 to 18 years – (Me (age median) = 12; Q1 (lower quartile) = 9; Q2 (upper quartile) = 14.5 – were analyzed in the Yaroslavl Children's Clinical Hospital. The researchers assessed diagnostic and management algorithms. All children had a high risk of appendicitis (PAS (Pediatrics appendicitis score) ≥ 6 points) because of changes in the appendix and findings of ultrasound examination, but due to the symptoms relief, no surgical interventions were performed.
Results. 78 (84.8%) children were prescribed antibacterial therapy. The median duration of symptom regression was 2 days (Q1 = 1 day; Q2 =4 days). On days 5–8 (Q1–Q2) (Me = 6 days), relief of all symptoms of the disease was recorded.
The average diameter dimensions of the vermiform process, by ultrasound findings at the initial examination, were 8.6 ± 1.47 (95% CI 8.31–8.92), wall thickness – 3.2 ± 0.39 (95% CI 3.12–3.28). After the symptom relief , these indicators were 6.3 ± 1.29 (95% CI 5.95–6.58) and 2.0 ± 0.63 (95% CI 1.18–1.88), respectively. The decrease in size was statistically significant (p < 0.001), signs regressed in parallel (r = 0.63; p < 0.0001).
95% CI lower limit of ultrasonographic parameters at the initial examination exceeded the threshold values indicating inflammatory changes (8 mm and 2.7 mm, respectively). After regression of the disease symptoms, 95% CI upper limit returned to the normal state.
Conclusion. The presented clinical observations may be considered as cases of appendix inflammation with regression. The selected clinical and ultrasonographic criteria can be used both for verifying inflammation and for assessing the regression of inflammatory process.
About the authors
V. F. Blandinskij
Yaroslavl State Medical University
Email: fake@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9392-0994
150000, Yaroslavl
РоссияS. V. Sokolov
Yaroslavl Children’s Clinical Hospital
Author for correspondence.
Email: sokolov_sergey@inbox.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3176-8229
150042, Yaroslavl
РоссияA. L. Anfinogenov
Yaroslavl Children’s Clinical Hospital
Email: fake@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6452-4565
150042, Yaroslavl
РоссияA. Yu. Kislova
Yaroslavl Children’s Clinical Hospital;Yaroslavl State Medical University
Email: fake@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4714-8702
150042, Yaroslavl
150000, Yaroslavl
РоссияA. A. Nizovceva
City Emergency Hospital
Email: fake@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1246-7084
347380, Volgodonsk, Rostov region
РоссияA. I. Andreev
Yaroslavl Children’s Clinical Hospital
Email: fake@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7410-1512
150042, Yaroslavl
РоссияI. A. Bereznjak
Yaroslavl Children’s Clinical Hospital
Email: fake@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6645-1125
150042, Yaroslavl
РоссияD. A. Neznakomova
Yaroslavl State Medical University
Email: fake@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3971-3644
150000, Yaroslavl
РоссияA. V. Lugovkin
Yaroslavl Children’s Clinical Hospital
Email: fake@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7822-2493
150042, Yaroslavl
РоссияA. A. Vinogradova
Yaroslavl Children’s Clinical Hospital
Email: fake@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2887-3631
150042, Yaroslavl
РоссияReferences
- Wilms I.M., de Hoog D.E., de Visser D.C., Janzing H.M. Appendectomy versus antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis. Cochrane database syst rev. 2011; (11): CD008359. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008359.pub2
- Harnoss J.C., Zelienka I., Probst P., Grummich K., Müller-Lantzsch C., Harnoss J.M., Ulrich A., Büchler M.W., Diener M.K. Antibiotics versus surgical therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis: Systematic review and Meta-analysis of controlled trials. Ann. Surg. 2017; 265(5): 889–900. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002039
- Salminen P., Tuominen R., Paajanen H., Rautio T., Nordström P., Aarnio M., Rantanen T., Hurme S., Mecklin J.P., Sand J., Virtanen J., Jartti A., Grönroos J.M. Five-year follow-up of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in the APPAC randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2018; 320(12): 1259–65. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.13201
- Svensson J.F., Almstrom M., Naji H., Hall N.J., Eaton S., Pierro A., Wester T. Nonoperative treatment with antibiotics versus surgery for acute nonperforated appendicitis in children: A pilot randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2015; 261: 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000000835
- Шалыгин В.А., Полковникова С.А., Варламов К.Г., Горленко Л.В. Миотропный спазмолитик в консервативном лечении недеструктивных форм острого аппендицита у детей. Медицина: теория и практика. 2019; 3(1): 108–9.
- Minneci P.C., Mahida J.B., Lodwick D.L., Sulkowski J.P., Nacion K.M., Cooper J.N., Ambeba E.J., Moss R.L., Deans K.J. Effectiveness of patient choice in nonoperative vs surgical management of pediatric uncomplicated acute appendicitis. JAMA Surg. 2016; 151(5): 408–15. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2015.4534
- Patkova B., Svenningsson A., Almstrӧm M., Eaton S., Wester T., Svensson J.F. Nonoperative treatment versus appendectomy for acute nonperforated appendicitis in children: Five-year follow up of a randomized controlled pilot trial. Ann Surg. 2020; 271: 1030–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000003646
- Golash V., Willson P.D. Early laparoscopy as a routine procedure in the management of acute abdominal pain: A review of 1,320 patients. Surg. Endosc. 2005; 19: 882–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-004-8866-1
- Sayed A.O. Zeidan N.S. Fahmy D.M., Ibrahim H.A. Diagnostic reliability of pediatric appendicitis score, ultrasound and low-dose computed tomography scan in children with suspected acute appendicitis. Therapeutics and clinical risk management. 2017; 13: 847–54. https://doi.org/10.2147/tcrm.s134153
- Samuel M. Pediatric appendicitis score. J Pediatr Surg. 2002; 37: 877–81. https://doi.org/10.1053/jpsu.2002.32893
- Akhtar W.M., Naveed M.Z., Khandwala K. Utility and accuracy of primary and secondary ultrasonographic signs for diagnosing acute appendicitis in pediatric patients. Cureus. 2018; 10(12): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.3779
- Fullerton K., Depinet H., Iyer S., Hall M., Herr S., Morton I., Lee T., Melzer-Lange M., on behalf of Children’s hospital association pediatric emergency services focus group. Association of hospital resources and imaging choice for appendicitis in pediatric emergency departments. Academic Emergency Medicine. 2017; 24: 400–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.13156
- Escribá A., Gamell A.M., Fernández Y., Quintillá J.M., Cubells C.L. Prospective validation of two systems of classification for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2011; 27: 165–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/pec.0b013e31820d6460
- Wu Han-Ping, Yang Wen-Chieh, Wu Kang-Hsi, Chen Chan-Yu, Fu Yun-Ching. Diagnosing appendicitis at different time points in children with right lower quadrant pain: comparison between Pediatric Appendicitis Score and the Alvarado score. World J Surg. 2012; 36(1): 216–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1310-5
- Fu J., Zhou X., Chen L., Lu S. Abdominal ultrasound and its diagnostic accuracy in diagnosing acute appendicitis: A Meta-analysis. Front. Surg. 2021; 8: 707160. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.707160
- Goldin A.B., Khanna P., Thapa M., McBroom J.A., Garrison M.M., Parisi M.T. Revised ultrasound criteria for appendicitis in children improve diagnostic accuracy. Pediatr. Radiol. 2011; 41(8): 993–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-011-2018-2
- Trout A.T., Towbin A.J., Fierke S.R., Zhang B., Larson D.B. Appendiceal diameter as a predictor of appendicitis in children: improved diagnosis with three diagnostic categories derived from a logistic predictive model. Eur. Radiol. 2015; 25(8): 2231–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3639-x
- Park N.H., Oh H.E., Park H.J., Park J.Y. Ultrasonography of normal and abnormal appendix in children. World J. Radiol. 2011; 3(4): 85–91. https://doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v3.i4.85/
- Дмитриева Е.В., Буланов М.Н., Нестеренко Т.С., Пермннов E.H., Шахнина И.А. Возможности ультразвукового исследования в диагностике острого флегмонозного аппендицита у детей. Вестник Ивановской медицинской академии. 2012; 2(17): 34–41.
- Botter L.A., Oliveira G.R., Farias J.L., Mauramo A., Garcia R.G., Queiros M.R.G., Silva M.R.C., Neto M.J.F., Funari M.B.G. Ultrasonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Einstein. 2005; 3(3): 185–9.
- Chicaiza H.P., Malia L., Mulvey C.H., Smith S.R. Revisiting the appendiceal diameter via ultrasound for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Pediatr. Emerg. Care. 2018; 34(11): 757–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEC.0000000000001278
- Hahn H., Macdonald E., Steinborn M. Sonographic detection of normal appendix in children and adolescents. Ultraschall. Med. 2008; 29(3): 281–5. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1027322
- Wiersma F., Srámek A., Holscher H.C. US features of the normal appendix and surrounding area in children. Radiology. 2005; 235(3): 1018–22. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2353040086
- Савастюк А.Е., Давыдова Л.А. Морфологические особенности червеобразного отростка у детей. Молодой учёный. 2021; 44(386): 40–6. https://moluch.ru/archive/386/85073/
- Ozel A., Orhan U.P., Akdana B., Disli C., Erturk S.M., Basak M., Karpat Z. Sonographic appearance of the normal appendix in children. J. Clin. Ultrasound. 2011; 39(4): 183–6.