Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 8/2020

01-08-2020 | Appendicitis | Computed Tomography

Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 2-mSv CT vs. conventional-dose CT in adolescents and young adults with suspected appendicitis: post hoc subgroup analysis of the LOCAT data

Authors: Yousun Ko, Woo Joo Lee, Ji Hoon Park, Hae Young Kim, Ji Ye Sim, Penampai Tannaphai, Kyoung Ho Lee, for LOCAT Group

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 8/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To test whether the difference in sensitivity or specificity between 2-mSv CT and conventional-dose CT (CDCT) for the diagnosis of appendicitis differs across subgroups of adolescents and young adults with suspected appendicitis.

Materials and Methods

We used the per-protocol analysis data of a trial conducted between Dec 2013 and Aug 2016, including 2773 patients (median age [interquartile range], 28 [21–35] years) and 160 radiologists from 20 hospitals. We defined subgroups by sex, body size, clinical risk scores for appendicitis, time of CT examination (i.e., working vs. after hours), CT machines, radiologists’ experience, previous site experience in 2-mSv CT, and site practice volume. We drew forest plots and tested for additive or multiplicative interaction between radiation dose and subgroup attributes. If any subgroup had fewer than 200 patients, we considered the results from that subgroup not meaningful.

Results

For most subgroups, the 95% CIs for the differences in sensitivity and specificity were 4.0 percentage points or narrower and contained the minute overall between-group differences. There was no significant interaction on sensitivity or specificity. A few subgroups, including those of extreme body sizes, high appendicitis inflammatory response scores, and hospitals with small appendectomy volume, were regarded to have insufficient numbers of patients.

Conclusions

There was no notable subgroup heterogeneity, which implies that 2-mSv CT can replace CDCT in diverse populations. Further studies are needed for the subgroups for which we had only small data.

Key Points

• The minute difference in sensitivity or specificity between the 2-mSv CT and conventional-dose CT (typically 7 mSv) groups were consistent across various patient or hospital characteristics.
• These results indicate that 2-mSv CT can replace conventional-dose CT in diverse populations.
• Further studies are needed to confirm whether 2-mSv CT can replace conventional-dose CT in patients of extreme body sizes, high appendicitis inflammatory response scores, or hospitals with small appendectomy volume, as those subgroups in our data included limited numbers of patients.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kim K, Kim YH, Kim SY et al (2012) Low-dose abdominal CT for evaluating suspected appendicitis. N Engl J Med 366:1596–1605CrossRef Kim K, Kim YH, Kim SY et al (2012) Low-dose abdominal CT for evaluating suspected appendicitis. N Engl J Med 366:1596–1605CrossRef
2.
go back to reference LOCAT Group (2017) Low-dose CT for the diagnosis of appendicitis in adolescents and young adults (LOCAT): a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2:793–804CrossRef LOCAT Group (2017) Low-dose CT for the diagnosis of appendicitis in adolescents and young adults (LOCAT): a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2:793–804CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Aly NE, McAteer D, Aly EH (2016) Low vs. standard dose computed tomography in suspected acute appendicitis: is it time for a change? Int J Surg 31:71–79CrossRef Aly NE, McAteer D, Aly EH (2016) Low vs. standard dose computed tomography in suspected acute appendicitis: is it time for a change? Int J Surg 31:71–79CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Yoon HM, Suh CH, Cho YA et al (2018) The diagnostic performance of reduced-dose CT for suspected appendicitis in paediatric and adult patients: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 28:2537–2548CrossRef Yoon HM, Suh CH, Cho YA et al (2018) The diagnostic performance of reduced-dose CT for suspected appendicitis in paediatric and adult patients: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 28:2537–2548CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Yun SJ, Ryu CW, Choi NY, Kim HC, Oh JY, Yang DM (2017) Comparison of low- and standard-dose CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:W198–W207CrossRef Yun SJ, Ryu CW, Choi NY, Kim HC, Oh JY, Yang DM (2017) Comparison of low- and standard-dose CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:W198–W207CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Park JH, for LOCAT Group (2014) Diagnostic imaging utilization in cases of acute appendicitis: multi-center experience. J Korean Med Sci 29:1308–1316CrossRef Park JH, for LOCAT Group (2014) Diagnostic imaging utilization in cases of acute appendicitis: multi-center experience. J Korean Med Sci 29:1308–1316CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Kim HJ, Lee KH, Kim MJ, Park SB, Ko Y (2020) Using 2-mSv appendiceal CT in usual practice for adolescents and young adults: willingness survey of 579 radiologists, emergency physicians, and surgeons from 20 hospitals. Korean J Radiol 21:68–76 Kim HJ, Lee KH, Kim MJ, Park SB, Ko Y (2020) Using 2-mSv appendiceal CT in usual practice for adolescents and young adults: willingness survey of 579 radiologists, emergency physicians, and surgeons from 20 hospitals. Korean J Radiol 21:68–76
9.
go back to reference Rothwell PM (2005) Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials: importance, indications, and interpretation. Lancet 365:176–186CrossRef Rothwell PM (2005) Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials: importance, indications, and interpretation. Lancet 365:176–186CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG et al (2007) Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 147:W163–W194CrossRef Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG et al (2007) Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 147:W163–W194CrossRef
11.
go back to reference VanderWeele TJ, Knol MJ (2014) A tutorial on interaction. Epidemiol Methods 3:33–72 VanderWeele TJ, Knol MJ (2014) A tutorial on interaction. Epidemiol Methods 3:33–72
12.
go back to reference Rothwell PM (1995) Can overall results of clinical trials be applied to all patients? Lancet 345:1616–1619CrossRef Rothwell PM (1995) Can overall results of clinical trials be applied to all patients? Lancet 345:1616–1619CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Ahn S, LOCAT Group (2014) LOCAT (low-dose computed tomography for appendicitis trial) comparing clinical outcomes following low- vs standard-dose computed tomography as the first-line imaging test in adolescents and young adults with suspected acute appendicitis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 15:28CrossRef Ahn S, LOCAT Group (2014) LOCAT (low-dose computed tomography for appendicitis trial) comparing clinical outcomes following low- vs standard-dose computed tomography as the first-line imaging test in adolescents and young adults with suspected acute appendicitis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 15:28CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Velanovich V, Satava R (1992) Balancing the normal appendectomy rate with the perforated appendicitis rate: implications for quality assurance. Am Surg 58:264–269PubMed Velanovich V, Satava R (1992) Balancing the normal appendectomy rate with the perforated appendicitis rate: implications for quality assurance. Am Surg 58:264–269PubMed
15.
go back to reference Bhangu A, Søreide K, Di Saverio S, Assarsson JH, Drake FT (2015) Acute appendicitis: modern understanding of pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management. Lancet 386:1278–1287CrossRef Bhangu A, Søreide K, Di Saverio S, Assarsson JH, Drake FT (2015) Acute appendicitis: modern understanding of pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management. Lancet 386:1278–1287CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Andersson R, Hugander A, Thulin A, Nystrom PO, Olaison G (1994) Indications for operation in suspected appendicitis and incidence of perforation. BMJ 308:107–110CrossRef Andersson R, Hugander A, Thulin A, Nystrom PO, Olaison G (1994) Indications for operation in suspected appendicitis and incidence of perforation. BMJ 308:107–110CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Kim HJ, Kim MS, Park JH et al (2017) Meaningful standard of reference for appendiceal perforation: pathology, surgery, or both? Ann Surg Treat Res 93:88–97CrossRef Kim HJ, Kim MS, Park JH et al (2017) Meaningful standard of reference for appendiceal perforation: pathology, surgery, or both? Ann Surg Treat Res 93:88–97CrossRef
18.
19.
go back to reference von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP (2007) The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 370:1453–1457CrossRef von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP (2007) The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 370:1453–1457CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE et al (2015) STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Radiology 277:826–832CrossRef Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE et al (2015) STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Radiology 277:826–832CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Wang R, Lagakos SW, Ware JH, Hunter DJ, Drazen JM (2007) Statistics in medicine—reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials. N Engl J Med 357:2189–2194CrossRef Wang R, Lagakos SW, Ware JH, Hunter DJ, Drazen JM (2007) Statistics in medicine—reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials. N Engl J Med 357:2189–2194CrossRef
22.
go back to reference MacGregor K, Li I, Dowdell T, Gray BG (2015) Identifying institutional diagnostic reference levels for CT with radiation dose index monitoring software. Radiology 276:507–517CrossRef MacGregor K, Li I, Dowdell T, Gray BG (2015) Identifying institutional diagnostic reference levels for CT with radiation dose index monitoring software. Radiology 276:507–517CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Park SB, Kim MJ, Ko Y, Sim JY, Kim HJ, Lee KH (2019) Structured reporting versus free-text reporting for appendiceal computed tomography in adolescents and young adults: preference survey of 594 referring physicians, surgeons, and radiologists from 20 hospitals. Korean J Radiol 20:246–255CrossRef Park SB, Kim MJ, Ko Y, Sim JY, Kim HJ, Lee KH (2019) Structured reporting versus free-text reporting for appendiceal computed tomography in adolescents and young adults: preference survey of 594 referring physicians, surgeons, and radiologists from 20 hospitals. Korean J Radiol 20:246–255CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Yang HK, Ko Y, Lee MH et al (2015) Initial performance of radiologists and radiology residents in interpreting low-dose (2-mSv) appendiceal CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:W594–W611CrossRef Yang HK, Ko Y, Lee MH et al (2015) Initial performance of radiologists and radiology residents in interpreting low-dose (2-mSv) appendiceal CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:W594–W611CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Daly CP, Cohan RH, Francis IR, Caoili EM, Ellis JH, Nan B (2005) Incidence of acute appendicitis in patients with equivocal CT findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1813–1820CrossRef Daly CP, Cohan RH, Francis IR, Caoili EM, Ellis JH, Nan B (2005) Incidence of acute appendicitis in patients with equivocal CT findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1813–1820CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Alvarado A (1986) A practical score for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Ann Emerg Med 15:557–564CrossRef Alvarado A (1986) A practical score for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Ann Emerg Med 15:557–564CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Andersson M, Andersson RE (2008) The appendicitis inflammatory response score: a tool for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis that outperforms the Alvarado score. World J Surg 32:1843–1849CrossRef Andersson M, Andersson RE (2008) The appendicitis inflammatory response score: a tool for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis that outperforms the Alvarado score. World J Surg 32:1843–1849CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Kim SH, Yoon JH, Lee JH et al (2015) Low-dose CT for patients with clinically suspected acute appendicitis: optimal strength of sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction for image quality and diagnostic performance. Acta Radiol 56:899–907CrossRef Kim SH, Yoon JH, Lee JH et al (2015) Low-dose CT for patients with clinically suspected acute appendicitis: optimal strength of sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction for image quality and diagnostic performance. Acta Radiol 56:899–907CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Zhang S, Liang F, Li W, Hu X (2015) Subgroup analyses in reporting of phase III clinical trials in solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 33:1697–1702CrossRef Zhang S, Liang F, Li W, Hu X (2015) Subgroup analyses in reporting of phase III clinical trials in solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 33:1697–1702CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Andersson T, Alfredsson L, Kallberg H, Zdravkovic S, Ahlbom A (2005) Calculating measures of biological interaction. Eur J Epidemiol 20:575–579CrossRef Andersson T, Alfredsson L, Kallberg H, Zdravkovic S, Ahlbom A (2005) Calculating measures of biological interaction. Eur J Epidemiol 20:575–579CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Firth D (1993) Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika 80:27–38CrossRef Firth D (1993) Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika 80:27–38CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Rothwell PM (2005) External validity of randomised controlled trials: “to whom do the results of this trial apply?”. Lancet 365:82–93CrossRef Rothwell PM (2005) External validity of randomised controlled trials: “to whom do the results of this trial apply?”. Lancet 365:82–93CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL et al (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 233:649–657CrossRef Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL et al (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 233:649–657CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Platon A, Jlassi H, Rutschmann OT et al (2009) Evaluation of a low-dose CT protocol with oral contrast for assessment of acute appendicitis. Eur Radiol 19:446–454CrossRef Platon A, Jlassi H, Rutschmann OT et al (2009) Evaluation of a low-dose CT protocol with oral contrast for assessment of acute appendicitis. Eur Radiol 19:446–454CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Karabulut N, Kiroglu Y, Herek D, Kocak TB, Erdur B (2014) Feasibility of low-dose unenhanced multi-detector CT in patients with suspected acute appendicitis: comparison with sonography. Clin Imaging 38:296–301CrossRef Karabulut N, Kiroglu Y, Herek D, Kocak TB, Erdur B (2014) Feasibility of low-dose unenhanced multi-detector CT in patients with suspected acute appendicitis: comparison with sonography. Clin Imaging 38:296–301CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Kollar D, McCartan DP, Bourke M, Cross KS, Dowdall J (2015) Predicting acute appendicitis? A comparison of the Alvarado score, the appendicitis inflammatory response score and clinical assessment. World J Surg 39:104–109CrossRef Kollar D, McCartan DP, Bourke M, Cross KS, Dowdall J (2015) Predicting acute appendicitis? A comparison of the Alvarado score, the appendicitis inflammatory response score and clinical assessment. World J Surg 39:104–109CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Scott AJ, Mason SE, Arunakirinathan M, Reissis Y, Kinross JM, Smith JJ (2015) Risk stratification by the appendicitis inflammatory response score to guide decision-making in patients with suspected appendicitis. Br J Surg 102:563–572CrossRef Scott AJ, Mason SE, Arunakirinathan M, Reissis Y, Kinross JM, Smith JJ (2015) Risk stratification by the appendicitis inflammatory response score to guide decision-making in patients with suspected appendicitis. Br J Surg 102:563–572CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Tan WJ, Acharyya S, Goh YC et al (2015) Prospective comparison of the Alvarado score and CT scan in the evaluation of suspected appendicitis: a proposed algorithm to guide CT use. J Am Coll Surg 220:218–224CrossRef Tan WJ, Acharyya S, Goh YC et al (2015) Prospective comparison of the Alvarado score and CT scan in the evaluation of suspected appendicitis: a proposed algorithm to guide CT use. J Am Coll Surg 220:218–224CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 2-mSv CT vs. conventional-dose CT in adolescents and young adults with suspected appendicitis: post hoc subgroup analysis of the LOCAT data
Authors
Yousun Ko
Woo Joo Lee
Ji Hoon Park
Hae Young Kim
Ji Ye Sim
Penampai Tannaphai
Kyoung Ho Lee
for LOCAT Group
Publication date
01-08-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 8/2020
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06811-y

Other articles of this Issue 8/2020

European Radiology 8/2020 Go to the issue