Acute Appendicitis During Pregnancy: A Case Series of 42 Pregnant Women.
acute appendicitis
appendectomy
neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio
platelet-lymphocyte ratio
pregnancy
Journal
Cureus
ISSN: 2168-8184
Titre abrégé: Cureus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101596737
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2021
Aug 2021
Historique:
accepted:
31
08
2021
entrez:
14
10
2021
pubmed:
15
10
2021
medline:
15
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Introduction It is difficult to diagnose the symptoms of acute appendicitis in pregnant women due to its similarities with pregnancy physiology. In this study, we examined the diagnostic value of laboratory parameters in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant women. Material and methods Forty-two patients who underwent appendectomy during pregnancy were evaluated. The demographic characteristics, laboratory parameters and imaging methods of the patients were examined. According to the pathology results, the patients were evaluated in two groups as normal appendix and acute appendicitis. In addition, a non-pregnant control group was formed to compare the results between the pregnant and control groups. Results The mean age of the 42 patients was 30±6 years, and the pathology results were evaluated as normal in 16 (38.1%) of the patients. As imaging methods, ultrasonography was undertaken in all patients, with MRI being additionally performed in two patients. When the normal appendix and acute appendicitis groups were compared, no significant difference was observed in terms of laboratory parameters (neutrophil, lymphocyte, white blood cell and platelet counts, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-lymphocyte ratio, mean thrombocyte volume, red cell distribution width, and pregnancy trimesters (P>0.05). The group that had undergone appendectomy had a significantly higher rate of negative appendectomy compared to the control group (P=0.001). Conclusion Laboratory parameters alone cannot be sufficient for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant patients. If clinical examination, laboratory parameters and USG are not sufficient for diagnosis, MRI is the imaging method that should be considered to reduce negative appendectomy rate.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34646676
doi: 10.7759/cureus.17627
pmc: PMC8484999
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e17627Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021, Akın et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Jan;196(1):4-12
pubmed: 21178041
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2016 Nov;22(6):545-548
pubmed: 28074461
Am J Perinatol. 2017 May;34(6):523-528
pubmed: 27788534
Bull Emerg Trauma. 2018 Apr;6(2):122-127
pubmed: 29719842
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2015 Mar-Apr;61(2):170-7
pubmed: 26107368
J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2012 Jun;28(3):152-9
pubmed: 22816059
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019 Nov;50(5):1367-1376
pubmed: 30883988
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019 Mar 20;:1-6
pubmed: 30843442
World J Emerg Surg. 2020 Apr 15;15(1):27
pubmed: 32295644
World J Emerg Surg. 2019 Jul 22;14:37
pubmed: 31367227
Radiology. 2006 Mar;238(3):891-9
pubmed: 16505393
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2018 Jul;24(4):333-336
pubmed: 30028491
World J Surg. 2017 Jan;41(1):75-81
pubmed: 27730353
Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2015 Nov;31(11):591-6
pubmed: 26678940
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2020 Sep;26(5):769-776
pubmed: 32946079
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2018 Sep;24(5):423-428
pubmed: 30394495
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2020 Dec;27(1):85-88
pubmed: 33394465
Radiology. 2009 Mar;250(3):749-57
pubmed: 19244044
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2010 May;16(3):248-52
pubmed: 20517752