Browsing by Author "Farzal, Zehra"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Accuracy in Diagnosing Pediatric Appendicitis: Discordance in Diagnosis and Masqueraders(2016-04-04) Farzal, Zehra; Fischer, Anne C.; Piper, Hannah; Schindel, DavidBACKGROUND: The classification of perforated versus nonperforated appendicitis remains poorly defined despite being clinically significant and requiring dramatically different therapeutic approaches. We hypothesized that there is substantial variability in the determination of perforated and nonperforated appendicitis across specialties due to the lack of standardized criteria. To identify and quantify the degree of variability in the diagnosis of acute versus perforated appendicitis, a comparative analysis of radiologic results, operative findings, and pathologic review was undertaken to identify the degree of discordance across specialties as the primary objective. Given the new suggested paradigm of non-operative management of acute appendicitis, a secondary objective was to identify the incidence of atypical diagnoses detected among appendectomy specimens to better elucidate those potentially missed in non-operative management. METHODS: An IRB-approved retrospective review of 1311 appendectomies over a 16-month period at an independent children's hospital allowed a comparison of the diagnostic classification of appendicitis as perforated (PA) or nonperforated (NPA) based on radiology (R), operative (O), and pathology (P) reports. Three groups, P+O (N=1241), P+R (N=516), O+R (N=512), were compared to identify inter-specialty discordance in classification. The length of stay (LOS) was analyzed as a proxy for clinical behavior to confirm that the diagnostic classification was consistent with the clinical behavior of being perforated or nonperforated (PA with LOS >48hours and NPA with LOS ≤48 hours). Given the numerous pathologic descriptives of appendicitis, a more extensive pathologic review of all appendectomies was done to identify an intra-specialty variance in diagnostic classification and to identify any other diagnosis in the setting of presumed appendicitis. This arm of the study involved an expanded IRB-approved retrospective review of pediatric patients (n=6816) who underwent appendectomies at an independent children's hospital over an 11-year period from January 2000 to December 2010. Inclusion criteria were age <17 and surgery for presumed appendicitis, thus excluding incidental appendectomies (n=269) with a final review of 6547 specimens. RESULTS: In the assessment of the degree of discordance, the subsets P+O, P+R, O+R revealed a discordance of 11%, 15.7% and 16.6% within the classification of appendicitis respectively. In the O+R group, 35% of the cases that were operatively designated as 'perforated' contradicted the radiologic diagnosis of being 'nonperforated' appendicitis. Cases designated as PA in all subsets (P+O, P+R, O+R) clinically behaved as perforated with a mean LOS>48 hours (97, 95, 95, respectively), whereas the cases designated as nonperforated appendicitis (NPA) exhibited greater variation from the expected LOS≤48 hours, with means 35, 83, and 62, respectively. The more exhaustive pathologic review identified 7 classifications for appendicitis in 91.6% patients, 5% false positives, and ~3% coincident other diagnoses. 5998 (91.6%) subjects showed true appendicitis including acute non-perforated, perforated, chronic, suppurative, gangrenous, necrotizing, and catarrhal appendicitis. In 224 subjects (3.4%), diagnoses other than appendicitis were identified: non-inflammatory obstruction (n=71), other infectious etiologies (n=58), non-specific inflammatory changes (n=58), extra-appendiceal pathology (n=31), tumors (n=10), and foreign body (n=2). Of the tumors, 6 patients with true appendicitis had co-existing carcinoid tumors. 325 specimens (5.0%) were documented as negative appendicitis. CONCLUSION: Variability in the classification of appendicitis between specialties suggests an error rate inherent in diagnosis. This error rate may explain why identifying best clinical guidelines for length of antibiotic therapy and treatment has been elusive. Standardizing classification criteria across specialties may help identify best practices for optimal use of hospital resources and improve diagnostic accuracy for meaningful clinical trials. This study represents the largest analysis of the incidence of pathologies that mimic appendicitis in the pediatric population, conveying a broad overlap of diagnoses that present in a similar fashion. Given how commonly appendicitis is diagnosed, follow-up for routine appendectomies has been streamlined and expedited in such a way that the review of pathology by the practitioner may be overlooked. The number of infectious etiologies and tumors detected reinforces the increasing importance of pathology review in post-operative follow-up to appropriately diagnose uncommon conditions that may necessitate further work-up and treatment. Additionally, the possibility of missing an alternative or co-incidental diagnosis such as a carcinoid tumor in the non-operative management of appendicitis merits some reflection in planning operative versus non-operative management. Given the recent popularity of non-operative therapy for appendicitis, this research gives the clinician a reliable incidence of other potential diagnoses if symptoms recur. Having percentages for conditions that present similarly also allows for proper counseling of patients who opt for non-operative management.Item The Diagnostic Dilemma of Identifying Perforated Appendicitis(2013-01-22) Farzal, Zehra; Fischer, Anne C.; Khan, NudratBACKGROUND: Despite 61 clinical trials on pediatric appendicitis in the Cochrane database over the last decade, a defined best clinical pathway for acute versus complicated appendicitis remains lacking. The lack of accuracy in the classification of appendicitis can affect the therapeutic course and associated costs since the average cost per case of complicated appendicitis at USD 12,300 which is twice as expensive as uncomplicated appendicitis at USD 6,355 per case1. We hypothesize that the variability in the diagnosis of complicated appendicitis results in a discordance. METHOD: An IRB-approved retrospective review of appendectomies (N=1311) from a 16-month period from 2010 and 2011, excluding interval or incidental appendectomies and including CT imaging, was analyzed for demographics, length of stay (LOS), post-operative antibiotics, and radiological (R), pathologic (P), and operative (O) reports. The classification of appendicitis as "perforated" was compared in a 3-way analysis between radiology (R), pathology (P), and operative reports (O) to identify the incidence of discordance. Classification was compared to LOS, to determine if the diagnosis was consistent with being "acute" (A) 0-48 hours admission or "perforated" (P) >48 hours. RESULTS: 1241 appendectomies met criteria to enter the three study sets: P+O, O+R, and P+R, (N= 1241, 550, and 550, respectively). In study subsets with radiology (P+R and O+R), 47% had a CT with a definite radiologic diagnosis in 44%. The discordance in diagnosis in P+O, P+R, O+R was 11%, 15.7% and 16.6%, respectively. Pathology and operative reports had the most consistent diagnoses with a concordance of 89%. The O+R group had 16.6% discordance, of which 35% of cases were intraoperatively determined to be perforated, but actually 38.9% of those cases had a LOS <48hrs, consistent with being acute nonperforated. The LOS in the >48 hours group was nontrivial with a median of 88 hours (range 50-272). CONCLUSION: There is a substantial discrepancy between operative, radiologic, and pathologic reports with the greatest discordance occurring between radiologic and operative diagnoses. The variation in the LOS confirms this discordance. Although, the diagnostic classification of complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis are not standardized which contributes to the discordance, the consequences are substantial in terms of medical costs and patient length of stay. Standardizing the criteria for the classification of the type of appendicitis across specialties may improve diagnostic accuracy needed for meaningful clinical trials and to identify best practices for optimal use of hospital resources and health care costs that continue to be elusive.Item Masqueraders for Appendicitis(2015-01-26) Farzal, Zehra; Khan, N.; Cope-Yokoyama, S.; Fischer, A.C.INTRODUCTION: Patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) are often subject to pulmonary infections treated with antibiotics such as aminoglycosides which have the side effect of sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Since children with CF are often on prolonged courses and/or higher doses, they are particularly at risk. OBJECTIVE: To review the role of routine hearing screening for SNHL in children with CF who have been on aminoglycoside therapy. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane, SCOPUS, and OVID databases REVIEW METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A comprehensive PubMed MeSH search of the English language literature with human subjects only was performed to include all indexed years and the search strategy was adapted to the additional databases. Results: Twelve studies (1979-2014) were included in the review. Three of the 12 articles also studied adult CF patients. The study population included 762 children (age range, 5 months-20 years). Objective hearing screening measures included pure tone audiometry (PTA) at standard ± high frequency threshold (12/12), distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) (4/12), transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (1/12), and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) (1/12). The overall prevalence of SNHL ranged from 0% to 29%. In a subset of children with high levels of exposure, up to 44% had SNHL. Eight studies recommended hearing screening in CF children on aminoglycosides of which 2 studies recommended screening regardless of aminoglycoside exposure. Four studies made no recommendations and in three of these, the children had a short course of aminoglycosides. HFPTA was the most commonly recommended screening measure followed by DPOAEs. CONCLUSION: Hearing screenings are quick and inexpensive measures leading to interventions that can prevent significant cognitive and linguistic developmental difficulties in children secondary to hearing loss. Routine hearing screening in children with CF exposed to aminoglycosides is supported by the current literature based on the high prevalence of SNHL in this population. Future studies should define the optimal timing for hearing screening during and after aminoglycoside therapy.