Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of procalcitonin, C-reactive protein and white blood cell count for suspected acute appendicitis
Top Cited Papers
- 30 November 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in British Journal of Surgery
- Vol. 100 (3), 322-329
- https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9008
Abstract
Background: The aim was to evaluate the diagnostic value of procalcitonin, C‐reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell count (WBC) in uncomplicated or complicated appendicitis by means of a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods: The Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched, along with reference lists of relevant articles, without language restriction, to September 2012. Original studies were selected that reported the performance of procalcitonin alone or in combination with CRP or WBC in diagnosing appendicitis. Test performance characteristics were summarized using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and bivariable random‐effects models. Results: Seven qualifying studies (1011 suspected cases, 636 confirmed) from seven countries were identified. Bivariable pooled sensitivity and specificity were 33 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 21 to 47) and 89 (78 to 95) per cent respectively for procalcitonin, 57 (39 to 73) and 87 (58 to 97) per cent for CRP, and 62 (47 to 74) and 75 (55 to 89) per cent for WBC. ROC curve analysis showed that CRP had the highest accuracy (area under ROC curve 0·75, 95 per cent c.i. 0·71 to 0·78), followed by WBC (0·72, 0·68 to 0·76) and procalcitonin (0·65, 0·61 to 0·69). Procalcitonin was found to be more accurate in diagnosing complicated appendicitis, with a pooled sensitivity of 62 (33 to 84) per cent and specificity of 94 (90 to 96) per cent. Conclusion: Procalcitonin has little value in diagnosing acute appendicitis, with lower diagnostic accuracy than CRP and WBC. However, procalcitonin has greater diagnostic value in identifying complicated appendicitis. Given the imperfect accuracy of these three variables, new markers for improving medical decision‐making in patients with suspected appendicitis are highly desirable. Copyright © 2012 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords
This publication has 36 references indexed in Scilit:
- Influence of mesh type on the quality of early outcomes after inguinal hernia repair in ambulatory setting controlled study: Glucamesh® vs Polypropylene®Langenbecks Archiv für Chirurgie, 2010
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Noncontrast Computed Tomography for Appendicitis in Adults: A Systematic ReviewAnnals of Emergency Medicine, 2010
- Inflammatory markers for acute appendicitis in children: are they helpful?Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 2007
- Diagnostic value of blood inflammatory markers for detection of acute appendicitis in childrenBMC Surgery, 2006
- US or CT for Diagnosis of Appendicitis in Children and Adults? A Meta-AnalysisRadiology, 2006
- The Burden of Appendicitis-Related Hospitalizations in the United States in 1997Surgical Infections, 2004
- Meta-analysis of the clinical and laboratory diagnosis of appendicitisBritish Journal of Surgery, 2003
- The Clinical and Economic Correlates of Misdiagnosed AppendicitisArchives of Surgery, 2002
- Has Misdiagnosis of Appendicitis Decreased Over Time?JAMA, 2001
- False‐negative and False‐positive Errors in Abdominal Pain Evaluation Failure to Diagnose Acute Appendicitis and Unnecessary SurgeryAcademic Emergency Medicine, 2000