Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2013
  • Online publication date: March 2013

Case 66 - Pseudoappendicitis

from Bowel
Summary

Imaging description

CT is a highly accurate test for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, with a sensitivity and specificity of 94% or greater [1–4]. Appendiceal enlargement and periappendiceal inflammation are the most sensitive signs of acute appendicitis.

The maximum diameter of the normal appendix varies widely among patients and ranges from 3 to 11 mm [5]. Various maximum diameter thresholds for the diagnosis of appendicitis with CT have been suggested, the most common being 6 mm. However, 24–45% of the population has an appendiceal diameter greater than 6 mm, making this threshold sensitive, but not specific [5, 6]. Hence, one should not diagnose acute appendicitis based on outer diameter alone. In particular, many normal appendices containing air will have an increased outer–outer wall diameter but non-thickened wall (Figure 66.1).

Airless fluid within an appendix of greater than 6mm outer wall diameter is rarely identified in normal patients, and although this does occur in 1–4% of normal appendices (Figure 66.2), it should raise the suspicion for appendicitis in the symptomatic patient [6, 7]. A “depth” of fluid within the appendix of greater than 2.6mm has been suggested as more sensitive and specific for acute appendicitis by one institution [8, 9].

As the outer diameter of the appendix includes a variable quantity of luminal contents, many have suggested evaluating the mural thickness of the appendix. The mural thickness can be assessed either by measuring it directly in patients with luminal contents or, in patients without appendiceal luminal contents, by measuring the outer wall diameter of the appendix and dividing by two. The average single-wall thickness of the normal appendix on CT is approximately 1.5mm (range, 0.25–3.1mm), and only 0.9–2% of normal patients will have an appendiceal wall thickness of 3mm or more [7, 10].

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Pearls and Pitfalls in Emergency Radiology
  • Online ISBN: 9781139135047
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139135047
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×
References
Rao, PM, Rhea, JT, Novelline, RA, et al. Helical CT technique for the diagnosis of appendicitis: prospective evaluation of a focused appendix CT examination. Radiology. 1997;202(1):139–44.
Balthazar, EJ, Megibow, AJ, Siegel, SE, Birnbaum, BA.Appendicitis: prospective evaluation with high-resolution CT. Radiology. 1991;180(1):21–4.
Rao, PM, Rhea, JT, Novelline, RA, et al. Helical CT combined with contrast material administered only through the colon for imaging of suspected appendicitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169(5):1275–80.
Anderson, SW, Soto, JA, Lucey, BC, et al. Abdominal 64-MDCT for suspected appendicitis: the use of oral and IV contrast material versus IV contrast material only. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193(5):1282–8.
Kim, HC, Yang, DM, Jin, W, Park, SJ.Added diagnostic value of multiplanar reformation of multidetector CT data in patients with suspected appendicitis. Radiographics. 2008;28(2):393–405; discussion 406.
Webb, EM, Wang, ZJ, Coakley, FV, et al. The equivocal appendix at CT: prevalence in a control population. Emerg Radiol. 2010;17(1):57–61.
Tamburrini, S, Brunetti, A, Brown, M, Sirlin, CB, Casola, G.CT appearance of the normal appendix in adults. Eur Radiol. 2005;15(10):2096–103.
Moteki, T, Horikoshi, H.New CT criterion for acute appendicitis: maximum depth of intraluminal appendiceal fluid. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(5):1313–19.
Moteki, T, Ohya, N, Horikoshi, H.Evaluation of the maximum depth of intraluminal appendiceal fluid to diagnose appendicitis with a 64-detector row CT scanner. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2011;35(6):703–10.
Webb, EM, Joe, BN, Coakley, FV, et al. Appendiceal wall thickening at CT in asymptomatic patients with extraintestinal malignancy may mimic appendicitis. Clin Imaging. 2009;33(3):200–3.
Johnson, PT, Horton, KM, Kawamoto, S, et al. MDCT for suspected appendicitis: effect of reconstruction section thickness on diagnostic accuracy, rate of appendiceal visualization, and reader confidence using axial images. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(4):893–901.
Paulson, EK, Harris, JP, Jaffe, TA, Haugan, PA, Nelson, RC.Acute appendicitis: added diagnostic value of coronal reformations from isotropic voxels at multi-detector row CT. Radiology. 2005;235(3):879–85.
Raja, AS, Wright, C, Sodickson, AD, et al. Negative appendectomy rate in the era of CT: an 18-year perspective. Radiology. 2010;256(2):460–5.
Checkoff, JL, Wechsler, RJ, Nazarian, LN.Chronic inflammatory appendiceal conditions that mimic acute appendicitis on helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179(3):731–4.