Korean Journal of Radiology

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Low-Dose Abdominal CT for Evaluating Suspected Appendicitis in Adolescents and Young Adults: Review of Evidence

  • Ji Hoon Park (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Paulina Salminen (Department of Surgery, University of Turku) ;
  • Penampai Tannaphai (Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University) ;
  • Kyoung Ho Lee (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
  • Received : 2021.07.22
  • Accepted : 2021.11.21
  • Published : 2022.05.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Due to its excellent diagnostic performance, CT is the mainstay of diagnostic test in adults with suspected acute appendicitis in many countries. Although debatable, extensive epidemiological studies have suggested that CT radiation is carcinogenic, at least in children and adolescents. Setting aside the debate over the carcinogenic risk of CT radiation, the value of judicious use of CT radiation cannot be overstated for the diagnosis of appendicitis, considering that appendicitis is a very common disease, and that the vast majority of patients with suspected acute appendicitis are adolescents and young adults with average life expectancies. Given the accumulated evidence justifying the use of low-dose CT (LDCT) of only 2 mSv, there is no reasonable basis to insist on using radiation dose of multi-purpose abdominal CT for the diagnosis of appendicitis, particularly in adolescents and young adults. Published data strongly suggest that LDCT is comparable to conventional dose CT in terms of clinical outcomes and diagnostic performance. In this narrative review, we will discuss such evidence for reducing CT radiation in adolescents and young adults with suspected appendicitis.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The authors thank to Yousun Ko, Hae Young Kim, Jungheum Cho, Ji Ye Sim, and Seungjae Lee for help in preparing the manuscript.

References

  1. Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP, McHugh K, Lee C, Kim KP, et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2012;380:499-505  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60815-0
  2. Mathews JD, Forsythe AV, Brady Z, Butler MW, Goergen SK, Byrnes GB, et al. Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. BMJ 2013;346:f2360 
  3. Krille L, Dreger S, Schindel R, Albrecht T, Asmussen M, Barkhausen J, et al. Risk of cancer incidence before the age of 15 years after exposure to ionising radiation from computed tomography: results from a German cohort study. Radiat Environ Biophys 2015;54:1-12  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-014-0580-3
  4. Huang WY, Muo CH, Lin CY, Jen YM, Yang MH, Lin JC, et al. Paediatric head CT scan and subsequent risk of malignancy and benign brain tumour: a nation-wide population-based cohort study. Br J Cancer 2014;110:2354-2360  https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.103
  5. Lee KH, Lee S, Park JH, Lee SS, Kim HY, Lee WJ, et al. Risk of hematologic malignant neoplasms from abdominopelvic computed tomographic radiation in patients who underwent appendectomy. JAMA Surg 2021;156:343-351  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2020.6357
  6. Haijanen J, Sula S, Salminen P. Optimizing the gold standard-low-dose computed tomography modalities as a part of clinical practice in acute appendicitis imaging. JAMA Surg 2021;156:351-352  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2020.6358
  7. Woo JH, Jeon JJ, Choi SJ, Choi JY, Jang YS, Lim YS, et al. Low-dose (2-mSv) computed tomography for suspected appendicitis: applicability in an emergency department. Am J Emerg Med 2018;36:2139-2143  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2018.03.031
  8. Kim HJ, Lee KH, Kim MJ, Park SB, Ko Y; LOCAT Group. 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 2020;21:68-76  https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2019.0010
  9. Prasad VK, Cifu AS. Ending medical reversal: improving outcomes, saving lives. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2019 
  10. Lietzen E, Ilves I, Salminen P, Paajanen H, Rautio T, Nordstrom P, et al. Clinical and laboratory findings in the diagnosis of right lower quadrant abdominal pain: outcome analysis of the APPAC trial. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:1691-1697  https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2015-0981
  11. Lietzen E, Mallinen J, Gronroos JM, Rautio T, Paajanen H, Nordstrom P, et al. Is preoperative distinction between complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis feasible without imaging? Surgery 2016;160:789-795  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2016.04.021
  12. Lahaye MJ, Lambregts DM, Mutsaers E, Essers BA, Breukink S, Cappendijk VC, et al. Mandatory imaging cuts costs and reduces the rate of unnecessary surgeries in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of having appendicitis. Eur Radiol 2015;25:1464-1470  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3531-0
  13. Garcia EM, Camacho MA, Karolyi DR, Kim DH, Cash BD, Chang KJ, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® right lower quadrant pain-suspected appendicitis. J Am Coll Radiol 2018;15:S373-S387  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2018.09.033
  14. Flum DR, Morris A, Koepsell T, Dellinger EP. Has misdiagnosis of appendicitis decreased over time? A population-based analysis. JAMA 2001;286:1748-1753  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.286.14.1748
  15. Paulson EK, Kalady MF, Pappas TN. Clinical practice. Suspected appendicitis. N Engl J Med 2003;348:236-242  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp013351
  16. Doria AS, Moineddin R, Kellenberger CJ, Epelman M, Beyene J, Schuh S, et al. US or CT for diagnosis of appendicitis in children and adults? A meta-analysis. Radiology 2006;241:83-94  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2411050913
  17. Terasawa T, Blackmore CC, Bent S, Kohlwes RJ. Systematic review: computed tomography and ultrasonography to detect acute appendicitis in adults and adolescents. Ann Intern Med 2004;141:537-546  https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-141-7-200410050-00011
  18. van Randen A, Bipat S, Zwinderman AH, Ubbink DT, Stoker J, Boermeester MA. Acute appendicitis: meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of CT and graded compression US related to prevalence of disease. Radiology 2008;249:97-106  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2483071652
  19. Cuschieri J, Florence M, Flum DR, Jurkovich GJ, Lin P, Steele SR, et al. Negative appendectomy and imaging accuracy in the Washington state surgical care and outcomes assessment program. Ann Surg 2008;248:557-563  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e318187aeca
  20. Park JH; LOCAT Group. Diagnostic imaging utilization in cases of acute appendicitis: multi-center experience. J Korean Med Sci 2014;29:1308-1316  https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2014.29.9.1308
  21. Lee J, Ko Y, Ahn S, Park JH, Kim HJ, Hwang SS, et al. Comparison of US and CT on the effect on negative appendectomy and appendiceal perforation in adolescents and adults: a post-hoc analysis using propensity-score methods. J Clin Ultrasound 2016;44:401-410  https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.22351
  22. Toorenvliet BR, Wiersma F, Bakker RF, Merkus JW, Breslau PJ, Hamming JF. Routine ultrasound and limited computed tomography for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. World J Surg 2010;34:2278-2285  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-010-0694-y
  23. National Surgical Research Collaborative. Multicentre observational study of performance variation in provision and outcome of emergency appendicectomy. Br J Surg 2013;100:1240-1252  https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9201
  24. Jaunoo SS, Hale AL, Masters JP, Jaunoo SR. An international survey of opinion regarding investigation of possible appendicitis and laparoscopic management of a macroscopically normal appendix. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2012;94:476-480  https://doi.org/10.1308/003588412X13373405385377
  25. Duke E, Kalb B, Arif-Tiwari H, Daye ZJ, Gilbertson-Dahdal D, Keim SM, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of MRI for evaluation of acute appendicitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016;206:508-517  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.15.14544
  26. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging: review and additional advice. Ann ICRP 2001;31:33-52 
  27. Mettler FA Jr, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M. Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology 2008;248:254-263  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2481071451
  28. American College of Radiology. ACR-AAPM-SPR practice parameter for diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses in medical X-ray imaging. ACR.org Web site. https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/Practice-Parameters/diag-ref-levels.pdf. Accessed Oct 8, 2021 
  29. Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency. Current Australian national diagnostic reference levels for multi detector computed tomography. Arpansa.gov.au Web site. https://www.arpansa.gov.au/research-and-expertise/surveys/national-diagnostic-reference-level-service/current-australian-drls/mdct. Accessed Oct 8, 2021 
  30. Kim JS, Lee SK, Kim SK, Yoo SM, Kim JM, Yoon SW. National diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses for 13 adult CT protocols and a paediatric head CT protocol: national survey of Korean hospitals. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2019;187:220-229  https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncz156
  31. European Commission. European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. EUR 16262. Luxembourg: European Commission, 2000 
  32. Kanda R, Akahane M, Koba Y, Chang W, Akahane K, Okuda Y, et al. Developing diagnostic reference levels in Japan. Jpn J Radiol 2020;39:307-314  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-020-01066-5
  33. Deak PD, Smal Y, Kalender WA. Multisection CT protocols: sex- and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective dose from dose-length product. Radiology 2010;257:158-166  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10100047
  34. Johnson PT, Horton KM, Mahesh M, Fishman EK. Multidetector computed tomography for suspected appendicitis: multi-institutional survey of 16-MDCT data acquisition protocols and review of pertinent literature. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006;30:758-764  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.rct.0000228156.65904.b4
  35. Tsapaki V, Damilakis J, Paulo G, Schegerer AA, Repussard J, Jaschke W, et al. CT diagnostic reference levels based on clinical indications: results of a large-scale European survey. Eur Radiol 2021;31:4459-4469  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07652-5
  36. Keyzer C, Tack D, de Maertelaer V, Bohy P, Gevenois PA, Van Gansbeke D. Acute appendicitis: comparison of low-dose and standard-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT. Radiology 2004;232:164-172  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2321031115
  37. Keyzer C, Cullus P, Tack D, De Maertelaer V, Bohy P, Gevenois PA. MDCT for suspected acute appendicitis in adults: impact of oral and IV contrast media at standard-dose and simulated low-dose techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:1272-1281  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.08.1959
  38. Seo H, Lee KH, Kim HJ, Kim K, Kang SB, Kim SY, et al. Diagnosis of acute appendicitis with sliding slab ray-sum interpretation of low-dose unenhanced CT and standard-dose i.v. contrast-enhanced CT scans. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:96-105  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.08.1237
  39. Platon A, Jlassi H, Rutschmann OT, Becker CD, Verdun FR, Gervaz P, et al. Evaluation of a low-dose CT protocol with oral contrast for assessment of acute appendicitis. Eur Radiol 2009;19:446-454  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1164-x
  40. Kim SY, Lee KH, Kim K, Kim TY, Lee HS, Hwang SS, et al. Acute appendicitis in young adults: low- versus standard-radiation-dose contrast-enhanced abdominal CT for diagnosis. Radiology 2011;260:437-445  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11102247
  41. Kim K, Kim YH, Kim SY, Kim S, Lee YJ, Kim KP, et al. Low-dose abdominal CT for evaluating suspected appendicitis. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1596-1605  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1110734
  42. Kim SH, Yoon JH, Lee JH, Lim YJ, Kim OH, Ryu JH, et al. 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 2015;56:899-907  https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185114542297
  43. LOCAT Group. 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 2017;2:793-804  https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(17)30247-9
  44. Park JH, Kim B, Kim MS, Kim HJ, Ko Y, Ahn S, et al. Comparison of filtered back projection and iterative reconstruction in diagnosing appendicitis at 2-mSv CT. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2016;41:1227-1236  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0632-4
  45. Karabulut N, Kiroglu Y, Herek D, Kocak TB, Erdur B. Feasibility of low-dose unenhanced multi-detector CT in patients with suspected acute appendicitis: comparison with sonography. Clin Imaging 2014;38:296-301  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2013.12.014
  46. Poletti PA, Platon A, De Perrot T, Sarasin F, Andereggen E, Rutschmann O, et al. Acute appendicitis: prospective evaluation of a diagnostic algorithm integrating ultrasound and low-dose CT to reduce the need of standard CT. Eur Radiol 2011;21:2558-2566  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2212-5
  47. UNSCEAR. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. Volume I: sources. Report to the general assembly, scientific annexes A and B. New York: United Nations, 2008 
  48. Park JH, Jeon JJ, Lee SS, Dhanantwari AC, Sim JY, Kim HY, et al. Can we perform CT of the appendix with less than 1 mSv? A de-escalating dose-simulation study. Eur Radiol 2018;28:1826-1834  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5159-3
  49. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography--an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277-2284  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra072149
  50. Pickhardt PJ, Lawrence EM, Pooler BD, Bruce RJ. Diagnostic performance of multidetector computed tomography for suspected acute appendicitis. Ann Intern Med 2011;154:789-796  https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-154-12-201106210-00006
  51. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Implications of recent epidemiologic studies for the linear nonthreshold model and radiation protection. NCRP Commentary 27. Bethesda: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 2018 
  52. Journy N, Rehel JL, Ducou Le Pointe H, Lee C, Brisse H, Chateil JF, et al. Are the studies on cancer risk from CT scans biased by indication? Elements of answer from a large-scale cohort study in France. Br J Cancer 2015;112:185-193  https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.526
  53. Bosch de Basea M, Pearce MS, Kesminiene A, Bernier MO, Dabin J, Engels H, et al. EPI-CT: design, challenges and epidemiological methods of an international study on cancer risk after paediatric and young adult CT. J Radiol Prot 2015;35:611-628  https://doi.org/10.1088/0952-4746/35/3/611
  54. National Research Council. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2. Washington DC: The National Academies Press, 2006:422 
  55. Kiatpongsan S, Meng L, Eisenberg JD, Herring M, Avery LL, Kong CY, et al. Imaging for appendicitis: should radiation-induced cancer risks affect modality selection? Radiology 2014;273:472-482  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14132629
  56. Aly NE, McAteer D, Aly EH. Low vs. standard dose computed tomography in suspected acute appendicitis: is it time for a change? Int J Surg 2016;31:71-79  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.05.060
  57. Yoon HM, Suh CH, Cho YA, Kim JR, Lee JS, Jung AY, et al. The diagnostic performance of reduced-dose CT for suspected appendicitis in paediatric and adult patients: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2018;28:2537-2548  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5231-z
  58. Yun SJ, Ryu CW, Choi NY, Kim HC, Oh JY, Yang DM. Comparison of low-and standard-dose CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017;208:W198-W207  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.17274
  59. Rud B, Vejborg TS, Rappeport ED, Reitsma JB, Wille-Jorgensen P. Computed tomography for diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019;2019:CD009977 
  60. Sippola S, Virtanen J, Tammilehto V, Gronroos J, Hurme S, Niiniviita H, et al. The accuracy of low-dose computed tomography protocol in patients with suspected acute appendicitis: the OPTICAP study. Ann Surg 2020;271:332-338  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002976
  61. Ahn S; LOCAT group. 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 2014;15:28 
  62. Douglas PS. The theory and practice of imaging outcomes research. Lancet 2015;385:2334-2335  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60463-9
  63. Velanovich V, Satava R. Balancing the normal appendectomy rate with the perforated appendicitis rate: implications for quality assurance. Am Surg 1992;58:264-269 
  64. Scott JW, Loehrer AP. The utility of perforated appendix rate as a proxy for timely access to care. JAMA Surg 2020;155:1081-1082  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2020.2504
  65. Kim HJ, Kim MS, Park JH, Ahn S, Ko Y, Song SY, et al. Meaningful standard of reference for appendiceal perforation: pathology, surgery, or both? Ann Surg Treat Res 2017;93:88-97  https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2017.93.2.88
  66. Braveman P, Schaaf VM, Egerter S, Bennett T, Schecter W. Insurance-related differences in the risk of ruptured appendix. N Engl J Med 1994;331:444-449  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199408183310706
  67. Ko Y, Choi JW, Kim DH, Lee KJ, Shin SS, Woo JY, et al. Central image archiving and management system for multicenter clinical studies: lessons from low-dose CT for appendicitis trial. J Korean Soc Radiol 2017;76:165-172  https://doi.org/10.3348/jksr.2017.76.3.165
  68. Cho J, Lee S, Min HD, Kim HY, Ko Y, Park JH, et al. Final diagnosis and patient disposition following equivocal results on 2-mSv CT vs. conventional-dose CT in adolescents and young adults with suspected appendicitis: a post hoc analysis of large pragmatic randomized trial data. Eur Radiol 2021;31:9176-9187  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08020-7
  69. Yang HK, Ko Y, Lee MH, Woo H, Ahn S, Kim B, et al. Initial performance of radiologists and radiology residents in interpreting low-dose (2-mSv) appendiceal CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015;205:W594-W611  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.15.14513
  70. Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Lobo DN. Safety and efficacy of antibiotics compared with appendicectomy for treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2012;344:e2156 
  71. Salminen P, Paajanen H, Rautio T, Nordstrom P, Aarnio M, Rantanen T, et al. Antibiotic therapy vs appendectomy for treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: the APPAC randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2015;313:2340-2348  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.6154
  72. Flum DR, Davidson GH, Monsell SE, Shapiro NI, Odom SR, Sanchez SE, et al. A randomized trial comparing antibiotics with appendectomy for appendicitis. N Engl J Med 2020;383:1907-1919  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2014320
  73. Salminen P, Tuominen R, Paajanen H, Rautio T, Nordstrom P, Aarnio M, et al. Five-year follow-up of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in the APPAC randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2018;320:1259-1265  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.13201
  74. Sippola S, Haijanen J, Viinikainen L, Gronroos J, Paajanen H, Rautio T, et al. Quality of life and patient satisfaction at 7-year follow-up of antibiotic therapy vs appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis: a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg 2020;155:283-289  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2019.6028
  75. Kim HY, Park JH, Lee YJ, Lee SS, Jeon JJ, Lee KH. Systematic review and meta-analysis of CT features for differentiating complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis. Radiology 2018;287:104-115  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017171260
  76. Sippola S, Gronroos J, Sallinen V, Rautio T, Nordstrom P, Rantanen T, et al. A randomised placebo-controlled double-blind multicentre trial comparing antibiotic therapy with placebo in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: APPAC III trial study protocol. BMJ Open 2018;8:e023623 
  77. Kim HY, Ko Y, Park JH, Lee KH; LOCAT Group. Detection and false-referral rates of 2-mSv CT relative to standard-dose CT for appendiceal perforation: pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2020;215:874-884  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.19.22632
  78. Bom WJ, Bolmers MD, Gans SL, van Rossem CC, van Geloven AAW, Bossuyt PMM, et al. Discriminating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis by ultrasound imaging, computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy. BJS Open 2021;5:zraa030 
  79. Foley WD. CT features for complicated versus uncomplicated appendicitis: what is the evidence? Radiology 2018;287:116-118  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018180022
  80. Kim HY, Park JH, Lee SS, Lee WJ, Ko Y, Andersson RE, et al. CT in differentiating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis: presence of any of 10 CT features versus radiologists' gestalt assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2019;213:W218-W227  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.19.21331
  81. Kim HY, Park JH, Lee SS, Jeon JJ, Yoon CJ, Lee KH. Differentiation between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis: diagnostic model development and validation study. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020;46:948-959  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02737-7
  82. Atema JJ, van Rossem CC, Leeuwenburgh MM, Stoker J, Boermeester MA. Scoring system to distinguish uncomplicated from complicated acute appendicitis. Br J Surg 2015;102:979-990  https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9835
  83. Bom WJ, Scheijmans JCG, Salminen P, Boermeester MA. Diagnosis of uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in adults. Scand J Surg 2021;110:170-179  https://doi.org/10.1177/14574969211008330
  84. Kim HY, Lee S, Kim DH, Ko Y, Park JH, Ko A, et al. Conventional-dose CT versus 2-mSv CT for right colonic diverticulitis as an alternate diagnosis of appendicitis: secondary analysis of large pragmatic randomized trial data. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2021;217:1113-1121  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.21.25584
  85. Pooler BD, Lawrence EM, Pickhardt PJ. Alternative diagnoses to suspected appendicitis at CT. Radiology 2012;265:733-742  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12120614
  86. Alvarado A. A practical score for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Ann Emerg Med 1986;15:557-564  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-0644(86)80993-3
  87. Andersson M, Andersson RE. The appendicitis inflammatory response score: a tool for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis that outperforms the Alvarado score. World J Surg 2008;32:1843-1849  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-008-9649-y
  88. Ko Y, Lee WJ, Park JH, Kim HY, Sim JY, Tannaphai P, et al. 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. Eur Radiol 2020;30:4573-4585  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06811-y
  89. Benjaminov O, Atri M, Hamilton P, Rappaport D. Frequency of visualization and thickness of normal appendix at nonenhanced helical CT. Radiology 2002;225:400-406  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2252011551
  90. Karabulut N, Boyaci N, Yagci B, Herek D, Kiroglu Y. Computed tomography evaluation of the normal appendix: comparison of low-dose and standard-dose unenhanced helical computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007;31:732-740  https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0b013e318033c7de
  91. Lee CC, Golub R, Singer AJ, Cantu R Jr, Levinson H. Routine versus selective abdominal computed tomography scan in the evaluation of right lower quadrant pain: a randomized controlled trial. Acad Emerg Med 2007;14:117-122  https://doi.org/10.1197/j.aem.2006.08.007
  92. Andersson M, Kolodziej B, Andersson RE. Randomized clinical trial of appendicitis inflammatory response score-based management of patients with suspected appendicitis. Br J Surg 2017;104:1451-1461  https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10637
  93. Song H, Lee S, Park JH, Kim HY, Min HD, Jeon JJ, et al. Can patient triaging with clinical scoring systems reduce CT use in adolescents and young adults suspected of having appendicitis? Radiology 2021;300:350-358  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2021203884
  94. Eng KA, Abadeh A, Ligocki C, Lee YK, Moineddin R, Adams-Webber T, et al. Acute appendicitis: a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of US, CT, and MRI as second-line imaging tests after an initial US. Radiology 2018;288:717-727 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018180318