Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-07-2011 | Gastrointestinal

A comparison of the Accuracy of Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain

Authors: Adrienne van Randen, Wytze Laméris, H. Wouter van Es, Hans P. M. van Heesewijk, Bert van Ramshorst, Wim ten Hove, Willem H. Bouma, Maarten S. van Leeuwen, Esteban M. van Keulen, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Jaap Stoker, Marja A. Boermeester, on behalf of the OPTIMA study group

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 7/2011

Abstract

Objectives

Head-to-head comparison of ultrasound and CT accuracy in common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain.

Materials and methods

Consecutive patients with abdominal pain for >2 h and <5 days referred for imaging underwent both US and CT by different radiologists/radiological residents. An expert panel assigned a final diagnosis. Ultrasound and CT sensitivity and predictive values were calculated for frequent final diagnoses. Effect of patient characteristics and observer experience on ultrasound sensitivity was studied.

Results

Frequent final diagnoses in the 1,021 patients (mean age 47; 55% female) were appendicitis (284; 28%), diverticulitis (118; 12%) and cholecystitis (52; 5%). The sensitivity of CT in detecting appendicitis and diverticulitis was significantly higher than that of ultrasound: 94% versus 76% (p < 0.01) and 81% versus 61% (p = 0.048), respectively. For cholecystitis, the sensitivity of both was 73% (p = 1.00). Positive predictive values did not differ significantly between ultrasound and CT for these conditions. Ultrasound sensitivity in detecting appendicitis and diverticulitis was not significantly negatively affected by patient characteristics or reader experience.

Conclusion

CT misses fewer cases than ultrasound, but both ultrasound and CT can reliably detect common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain. Ultrasound sensitivity was largely not influenced by patient characteristics and reader experience.

Available only for authorised users

Stoker J, van Randen A, Laméris W, Boermeester MA (2009) Imaging patients with acute abdominal pain. Radiology 253:31–46PubMedCrossRef

Shuman WP, Ralls PW, Balfe DM et al (2000) Imaging evaluation of patients with acute abdominal pain and fever. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria. Radiology 215(Suppl):209–212PubMed

Puylaert JB (2003) Ultrasonography of the acute abdomen: gastrointestinal conditions. Radiol Clin North Am 41:1227–1242, viiPubMedCrossRef

The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (2007) ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 37:1–332

Stoker J (2008) Magnetic resonance imaging and the acute abdomen. Br J Surg 95:1193–1194PubMedCrossRef

Laméris W, van Randen A, van Es HW et al (2009) Imaging strategies for detection of urgent conditions in patients with acute abdominal pain: diagnostic accuracy study. BMJ 338:b2431PubMedCrossRef

van Randen A, Bipat S, Zwinderman AH, Ubbink DT, Stoker J, Boermeester MA (2008) Acute appendicitis: meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of CT and graded compression US related to prevalence of disease. Radiology 249:97–106PubMedCrossRef

Laméris W, van Randen A, Bipat S, Bossuyt PM, Boermeester MA, Stoker J (2008) Graded compression ultrasonography and computed tomography in acute colonic diverticulitis: meta-analysis of test accuracy. Eur Radiol 18:2498–2511PubMedCrossRef

van Randen A, Laméris W, Nio CY et al (2009) Inter-observer agreement for abdominal CT in unselected patients with acute abdominal pain. Eur Radiol 19:1394–1407PubMedCrossRef

10.

Laméris W, van Randen A, Dijkgraaf MG, Bossuyt PM, Stoker J, Boermeester MA (2007) Optimization of diagnostic imaging use in patients with acute abdominal pain (OPTIMA): design and rationale. BMC Emerg Med 7:9PubMedCrossRef

11.

Hertzberg BS, Kliewer MA, Bowie JD, Carroll BA, DeLong DH, Gray L et al (2000) Physician training requirements in sonography: how many cases are needed for competence? AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:1221–1227PubMed

12.

Cuschieri J, Florence M, Flum DR et al (2008) Negative appendectomy and imaging accuracy in the Washington State Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program. Ann Surg 248:557–563PubMed

13.

Rutjes AWS, Reitsma JB, Coomarasamy A, Khan KS, Bossuyt PMM (2007) Evaluation of diagnostic tests when there is no gold standard. A review of methods. Health Technol Assess 11(50)

14.

Gaitini D, Beck-Razi N, Mor-Yosef D et al (2008) Diagnosing acute appendicitis in adults: accuracy of color Doppler sonography and MDCT compared with surgery and clinical follow-up. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:1300–1306PubMedCrossRef

15.

Anderson SW, Soto JA, Lucey BC et al (2009) Abdominal 64-MDCT for suspected appendicitis: the use of oral and IV contrast material versus IV contrast material only. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:1282–1288PubMedCrossRef

16.

Gurusamy K, Samraj K, Gluud C, Wilson E, Davidson BR (2010) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the safety and effectiveness of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 97:141–150PubMedCrossRef

17.

Hainaux B, Agneessens E, Bertinotti R et al (2006) Accuracy of MDCT in predicting site of gastrointestinal tract perforation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:1179–1183PubMedCrossRef

18.

Lazarus DE, Slywotsky C, Bennett GL, Megibow AJ, Macari M (2004) Frequency and relevance of the “small-bowel feces” sign on CT in patients with small-bowel obstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1361–1366PubMed

19.

Maglinte DD, Howard TJ, Lillemoe KD et al (2008) Small-bowel obstruction: state-of-the-art imaging and its role in clinical management. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 6:130–139PubMedCrossRef

20.

Schmutz GR, Benko A, Fournier L, Peron JM, Morel E, Chiche L (1997) Small bowel obstruction: role and contribution of sonography. Eur Radiol 7:1054–1058PubMedCrossRef

21.

Silva AC, Pimenta M, Guimarães LS (2009) Small bowel obstruction: what to look for. Radiographics 29:423–439PubMedCrossRef

22.

Sheedy SP, Earnest F, Fletcher JG, Fidler JL, Hoskin TL (2006) CT of small-bowel ischemia associated with obstruction in emergency department patients: diagnostic performance evaluation. Radiology 241:729–736PubMedCrossRef

23.

Puylaert JB, Rutgers PH, Lalisang RI et al (1987) A prospective study of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of appendicitis. N Engl J Med 317:666–669PubMedCrossRef

24.

Terasawa T, Blackmore CC, Bent S, Kohlwes RJ (2004) Systematic review: computed tomography and ultrasonography to detect acute appendicitis in adults and adolescents. Ann Intern Med 141:537–546PubMed

25.

Leeflang MM, Moons KG, Reitsma JB, Zwinderman AH (2008) Bias in sensitivity and specificity caused by data-driven selection of optimal cutoff values: mechanisms, magnitude, and solutions. Clin Chem 54:729–737PubMedCrossRef

26.

Potter AW, Chandrasekhar CA (2008) US and CT evaluation of acute pelvic pain of gynaecologic origin in nonpregnant premenopausal patients. Radiographics 28:1645–1659, ReviewPubMedCrossRef

Title: A comparison of the Accuracy of Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain
Authors: Adrienne van Randen
Wytze Laméris
H. Wouter van Es
Hans P. M. van Heesewijk
Bert van Ramshorst
Wim ten Hove
Willem H. Bouma
Maarten S. van Leeuwen
Esteban M. van Keulen
Patrick M. Bossuyt
Jaap Stoker
Marja A. Boermeester
on behalf of the OPTIMA study group
Publication date: 01-07-2011
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 7/2011
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2087-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

A comparison of the Accuracy of Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2011

Metal artifact reduction by dual energy computed tomography using monoenergetic extrapolation

Assessment of thoracic aortic elasticity: a preliminary study using electrocardiographically gated dual-source CT

Synovitis maps for the assessment of inflammatory diseases of the hand

US-guided diffuse optical tomography for breast lesions: the reliability of clinical experience

Renal artery stenosis: comparative assessment by unenhanced renal artery mra versus contrast-enhanced MRA

Ultrasound assessment of the lateral collateral ligamentous complex of the elbow: imaging aspects in cadavers and normal volunteers