Some authors have assessed the diagnostic value of inflammatory m

Some authors have assessed the diagnostic value of inflammatory markers with varied designs

and results [7, 18–20]. Variety of designs explains the lack of evidence in the two meta-analysis published to date about inflammatory markers diagnostic utility [9, 21]. Although, over the last few decades, several inflammation markers have been proposed to increase diagnostic accuracy in AA including phospholipase A2, [4] amyloid selleck inhibitor A, [22] leukocyte elastase, [23] neutrophil count, [9] several interleukins and cytokines, [24] WBCs and neutrophil counts are certainly the most widely used. In this study, WBCs and neutrophil counts were significantly higher in patients with inflamed and complicated than normal appendix and in click here complicated than inflamed appendix. Several reports find more suggest that an elevated leukocyte count is usually the earliest laboratory test to indicate appendiceal inflammation, and most of the patients with acute appendicitis present with leukocytosis [25] despite several studies that acknowledge the limitations of this test [26, 27]. Sack et al. [28].found that WBCs count was clearly elevated in children with phlegmonous and perforated appendicitis. Mughal and Soomro [12] found total leucocytes and neutrophil counts elevated

in all their patients. Soomro [13] reported elevation of total leucocytes and neutrophils counts in 53.33% of their patients. Meanwhile, Yokoyama et al. [29] reported that WBCs counts and neutrophil percentage are not useful for surgical indication. Previous studies assessing the relationship between WBCs count and appendicitis have their findings reported in a variety of ways, including comparing mean values for total WBCs count in patients MRIP with and without appendicitis,

and variously using P-values, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV [23, 30]. These studies can be difficult to interpret, because both PPV and NPV depend on disease prevalence. Moreover, sensitivity and specificity alone do not allow clinicians to directly apply diagnostic tests results to individual patients. Grönroos et al. [4] were the first to report that an increased leukocyte count was a very early marker of appendiceal inflammation in adult patients, according to ROC analysis. Contrary to descriptive and comparing statistical methods, analysis of ROC curves allows the estimation and verification of diagnostic suitability of diagnostic parameters. LR(+) is defined as the true-positive rate over the false-positive rate. It allows the clinician to assess the likelihood that a patient with a given test result (i.e., elevated WBCs count) has that disease. Additionally, LR is independent of disease prevalence. Generally, a clinically useful diagnostic test has an LR >10 or <0.1.

Comments are closed.