PurposeAcute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common causes of an acute abdomen. The accuracies of the Alvarado and the acute inflammatory response (AIR) scores in the diagnosis of appendicitis is very low in Asian populations, so a new scoring system, the Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) system, was designed recently. We applied and compared the Alvarado, AIR, and RIPASA scores in the diagnoses of appendicitis in the Iranian population.MethodsWe prospectively compared the RIPASA, Alvarado, and AIR systems by applying them to 100 patients. All the scores were calculated for patients who presented with right quadrant pain. Appendectomies were performed; then, the postoperative pathology reports were correlated with the scores. Scores of 8, 7, and 5 or more are optimal cutoffs for the RIPASA, Alvarado, and AIR scoring systems, respectively. The sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values, negative predictive values (NPVs), positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs) for the 3 systems were determined.ResultsThe sensitivity and the specificity of the RIPASA score were 93.18% and 91.67%, respectively. The sensitivities of the Alvarado and the AIR scores were both 78.41%. The specificities of the Alvarado and the AIR scores were 100% and 91.67%, respectively. The RIPASA score correctly classified 93% of all patients confirmed with histological AA compared with 78.41% for the Alvarado and the AIR scores.ConclusionThe RIPASA scoring system had more sensitivity, better NPV, a positive LR, and a less negative LR for the Iranian population whereas the Alvarado scoring system was more specific.

BackgroundEpidemiology of cervical spine fractures (CSfx) in trauma patients of general population is not yet exclusively known.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the epidemiology of CSfx in trauma patients.Patients and MethodsData from trauma patients admitted in the emergency room (ER) of Shiraz Shahid Rajaei hospital during the 3.5 years period from September 22, 2009 to March 21, 2013, were gathered. All trauma patients with CSfx and/or spinal cord injuries were included in the study. The time of the trauma, mechanism of trauma, injury position, and incidence of cervical spine fractures in the patients were recorded.ResultsA total of 469 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of the patients was 34.7 years old, with a minimum age of 16 years old and a maximum age of 89 years old. Young adults were most frequently affected. Out of 469 cases, 368 patients (78.47%) were male and 101 (21.53%) were female. We had a total of 17 SCI cases among our patients (3.62%), out of which 5 (29.41%) were deceased. The total number of deaths in our study was 29 (6.18%); 5 (17.24%) with SCI and 24 (82.76%) without SCI.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that most victims of CSfx in our region are 16 to 40 years of age. A male predominance was observed, and motor vehicle collisions were the most frequent trauma mechanism leading to cervical spine injury (mostly due to car rollover accidents), with falls as the second most frequent. The rate of SCI in our study was 3.62% of all cases and the mortality rate was 6.18%.

No abstract

Objective: To determine the predictive value of repeated abdominal ultrasonography in patients with multiple trauma and decreased level of consciousness (LOC). Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted over a six-month period at Shahid Rajaee Trauma Hospital, Shiraz, Iran. We included hemodynamically stable blunt abdominal trauma patients with a decreased LOC (Glasgow Coma Scale≤13) who were referred to the neurosurgery ICU ward. Included cases underwent 1 contrast-enhanced CT scan and two-time ultrasonographic study of the abdomen with an interval of 48 hours. The diagnostic accuracy of the ultrasonography was determined according to the CT-scan results. Results: Overall 80 patients with mean age of 37.75±18.67 years were included. There were 17 (21.3%) women and 63 (78.8%) men among the patients. Compared with the CT-Scan, the first ultrasonography showed a sensitivity of 60%, specificity of 80%, PPV of 16.60%, NPV of 96.80%, and a diagnostic accuracy of 70%. The same values for the second ultrasonographic study were 80%, 79%, 20%, 98%, and 79%, respectively. In 4 (5%) patients whose first ultrasonography and CT scan results were negative, the second ultrasonography was positive for injury. Conclusion: In patients with blunt trauma to the abdomen, when the only indication of abdominal CT scan is a decreased LOC, two ultrasonographic studies can replace a CT imaging.