ABSTRACT

Conclusion:

Diagnostic value of helical CT and compression US are both high in diagnostic verification of patients in whom clinically acute apendicitis is suggested. But results of CT seem to be more accurate in diagnosis.

Results:

Final diagnoses were made by surgico-pathological results and clinical observations up to 24-48 hours with clinical and laboratory findings. In 21 patients, final diagnosis were acute appendicitis. Correct diagnosis was made by CT in 20, and by US in 16 of these 21 patients. Both CT and US were negative in 1 patient. In 5 of 14 patients which acute appendicitis were not the final diagnosis, CT was able to made alternative diagnoses. Normal apendix could be observed in 7 patients with CT and in 4 patients with US. In 1 patient in whom acute appendicitis was strongly suggested by CT and US, spontaneous regression occurred and surgery was not necessary. CT and US results of 4 patients did not correlate with the clinical diagnosis.

Materials and Methods:

Clinically suspected 35 cases of acute appendicitis according to their physical examinations and laboratory findings were prospectively evaluated by compression US and helical CT. For US examinations a dilated and uncompressible apendix for CT scans a dilated (6mm.) apendix, associated with periapendicular inflamatory reactions were primary criterias.

Objective:

The aim of this study was to compare advantages, accuracy and limitations of ultrasonography (US) and computed tomography (CT) in the definitive diagnosis of acute appendicitis.