Rectal examination in the differential diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adults
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Original Article
VOLUME: 21 ISSUE: 4
P: 175 - 178
November 2005

Rectal examination in the differential diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adults

Turk J Surg 2005;21(4):175-178
1. Atatürk Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Genel Cerrahi Kliniği, Bilkent / ANKARA
No information available.
No information available
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the role of routine digital rectal examination in the differential diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adult patients. Background: Although rectal examination has been suggested as a part of routine physical examination in patients with acute abdominal pain, the literature on this subject does not support its role in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Materials and Methods: One hundred and seventy adult patients diagnosed as acute appendicitis were included into the study, and underwent rectal examination. Findings of rectal examination were classified as normal or pathological. The patient’s discomfort due to rectal examination was evaluated. Operative findings were grouped as acute appendicitis, negative exploration and other intraabdominal pathologies. Intraoperative diagnoses were confirmed with histopathological examination. Pre and postoperative diagnoses were compared regarding the findings of rectal examination. Results: There was not any difference between the operative and histopathological diagnoses. There were 13 (5 male, 8 female) patients with a diagnosis of negative exploration or other intraabdominal pathologies. Rectal examination was not significant in neither male nor female patients in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Severe (16%), moderate (27%) or mild (55%) discomfort was revealed by the patients with normal rectal examination. Overall sensitivity of digital rectal examination was 17%, specificity was 62%, positive predictive value was 84%, negative predictive value was 6% and accuracy was 21%, in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Conclusion: Routine digital rectal examination does not add to the diagnosis or the treatment planning in acute appendicitis, and it may lead to misdiagnosis especially in female patients.

Keywords:
Appendicitis, rectal examination

References

1
Lally KP, Cox CS, Andrassy RJ. Appendix. In: Townsend CM, Beauchamp RD, Evers BM, Mattox KL, eds. Sabiston Textbook of Surgery. 17th ed. Pennsylvania: Elsevier Saunders; 2004. p.1381-99.
2
Porter JM, Ursic CM. Digital rectal examination for trauma: does every patient need one? Am Surg, 2001; 67: 438-41.
3
Campbell KA, Shaughnessy AF. Diagnostic utility of the digital rectal examination as part of the routine pelvic examination. J Fam Pract, 1998; 46: 165-7.
4
Dunning PG, Goldman MD. The incidence and value of rectal examination in children with suspected appendicitis. Ann R Coll Surg Engl, 1991; 73: 233-4.
5
Dixon JM, Elton RA, Rainey JB, et al. Rectal examination in patients with pain in the right lower quadrant of the abdomen. BMJ, 1991; 302: 386-8.
6
Kremer K, Kraemer M, Fuchs KH, et al. The diagnostic value of rectal examination of patients with acute appendicitis. Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl Kongressbd, 1998; 115: 1120-2.
7
Entman SS, Graves CR, Jarnagin BK, et al. Gynelogic Surgery. In: Townsend CM, Beauchamp RD, Evers BM, Mattox KL, eds. Sabiston Textbook of Surgery. 17 th ed. Pennsylvania: Elsevier Saunders; 2004. p. 2233-68.
8
Jaffe BM, Berger DH. The Appendix. İn: Brunicardi FC, Andersen DK, Billiar TR, Dunn DL, Hunter JG, Pollock RE, eds. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. 8 th ed. New York: The McGraw- Hill Companies; 2005. p. 1119-37.
9
Bonello JC, Abrams JS. The significance of a “positive” rectal examination in acute appendicitis. Dis Colon Rectum, 1979; 22: 97-101.
10
Manimaran N, Galland RB. Significance of routine digital rectal examination in adults presenting with abdominal pain. Ann R Coll Surg Engl, 2004; 86: 292-5.