DIAGNOSTIC PROFICIENCY OF FENYO-LINDBERG SCORING IN PATIENTS OF ACUTE APPENDICITIS

Main Article Content

Aruru Uttej
Indrajit Anandakannan
Selvakumar K
Gowthaman.M.D
Lochan Thanigachalam

Keywords

Acute Appendicitis, Fenyo-Lindberg Scoring System, Appendix

Abstract

Background: Acute appendicitis, a prevalent surgical emergency, demands timely and accurate diagnosis to avert complications. Despite technological advances, misdiagnosis rates remain significant. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic efficacy of the Fenyo-Lindberg (FL) scoring system in acute appendicitis cases.


 Methods: Conducted over one year, the cross-sectional study involved 100 patients with suspected acute appendicitis. Patients were categorized into two groups based on FL scores, and comparisons were made with histopathological diagnoses. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated.


 Results: Among the 100 patients, 54 exhibited acute appendicitis on histopathology. The FL scoring system demonstrated a sensitivity of 72%, specificity of 71%, PPV of 75%, and NPV of 68%. Vomiting, TLC >14,000, and pain progression were prevalent among appendicitis cases.


 Conclusion: The FL scoring system, relying on clinical and basic investigative parameters, emerged as a moderately effective tool for acute appendicitis diagnosis. While comparable to established systems, the study emphasizes the need for larger cohorts to validate findings and potential refinements to enhance diagnostic accuracy. This study contributes valuable insights, particularly in resource-limited settings, and further research can optimize the FL scoring system's utility in diverse populations.

Abstract 303 | pdf Downloads 0

References

1. Madžar Z, Kopljar M, Madžar T, Mesić M, Mužina Mišić D, Čiček S, Zovak M. Sensitivity and Specificity of Fenyö-Lindberg and Teicher Scores in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis in Women. Acta Clin Croat. 2016 Dec;55(4):593-599. doi: 10.20471/acc.2016.55.04.09.
2. Xingye W, Yuqiang L, Rong W, Hongyu Z. Evaluation of Diagnostic Scores for Acute Appendicitis. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2018 Feb;28(2):110-114. doi: 10.29271/jcpsp .2018.02.110.
3. Gonullu E, Bayhan Z, Capoglu R, Mantoglu B, Kamburoglu B, Harmantepe T, Altıntoprak F, Erkorkmaz U. Diagnostic Accuracy Rates of Appendicitis Scoring Systems for the Stratified Age Groups. Emerg Med Int. 2022 Oct 31;2022:2505977. doi: 10.1155/2022/2505977. eCollection 2022.
4. Capoglu R, Gonullu E, Bayhan Z, Coskun M, Harmantepe T, Kucuk F. Comparison of scoring systems regarding the gender as a parameter with the traditional scoring systems for predicting appendicitis. Updates Surg. 2022 Jun;74(3):1035-1042. doi: 10.1007/s13304-022-01272-y. Epub 2022 Apr 21.
5. Albiston (2002) The role of radiological imaging in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Can J Gastroenterol. 16: 451–463. PMID: 12177724.
6. Alvarado A (1986) A practical score for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Ann Emerg Med. 15: 557–564. PMID: 3963537.
7. Andersson RE, Hugander A, Thulin AJ (1992) Diagnostic accuracy and perforation rate in appendicitis: association with age and sex of the patient and with appendicectomy rate. Eur J Surg. 158: 37–41. PMID: 1348639.
8. Balthazar EJ, Megibow AJ, Siegel SE, Birnbaum BA (1991) Appendicitis: prospective evaluation with high-resolution CT. Radiology. 180: 21–24. PMID: 2052696.
9. Bendeck SE, Nino-Murcia M, Berry GJ, Jeffrey RB Jr (2002) Imaging for suspected appendicitis: negative appendectomy and perforation rates. Radiology. 225: 131–136. PMID: 12354996.

Most read articles by the same author(s)