RIPASA vs Modified Alvarado Scoring System for diagnosis of Appendicitis

Timilsina, Bhusan Raj; Shah, Rajiv; Kc, Sudeep Raj; Upadhyay, Hari Prasad; Lamsal, Sunita; Belbase, Narayan Prasad; Kumar, Sandeep

doi:10.3126/jcmsn.v14i4.21633

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also similar results were reported by Timislina et al, who said that the cut-off threshold point of the modified Alvarado score was set at 7.0, which yielded a sensitivity of 68.64% and a specificity of 28.57% 15. The PPV was 95% and the NPV was 5.12%.…”

supporting

confidence: 86%

A comparative study of RIPASA score and modified Alvarado score in diagnosis of acute appendicitis

Sherpiny

2019

Int Surg J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Various diagnostic criteria have been described for diagnosing acute appendicitis. Of these, Alvarado score has been the most commonly used. The RIPASA score is a new diagnostic scoring system developed for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and showed higher sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy as compared to Alvarado score. we want to compare prospectively Alvarado and RIPASA score by applying them to patients attending emergency department complaining of right iliac fossa pain that could probably be acute appendicitis. Methods: Patients with clinically suspected acute appendicitis were classified according to both Alvarado and RIPASA scoring systems before undergoing surgery. Histopathological examination of the removed appendix was taken as the gold standard for diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Results: Among (90%) patients had histologically confirmed appendicitis. With the cut-off value greater than 7.5 for RIPASA score; sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy were 88.2%, 14.5%, 73.1%, 32%,and 68% respectively. With the cut-off value greater than 7 for Alvarado score, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy and negative appendectomy rates were 51.2%, 80 %, 91 %, 29%, and 57%, respectively. 87.5% of patients were correctly stratified by RIPASA under higher probability group while only 45% were classified by Alvarado as high probability.Conclusions: RIPASA scoring system showed high sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy in comparison to Alvarado scoring system. So, it can be applied for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 86%

A comparative study of RIPASA score and modified Alvarado score in diagnosis of acute appendicitis

Sherpiny

2019

Int Surg J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another study from India showed 64.44% sensitivity and 58.82% specificity for the MAS versus 87.78% and 76.47%, respectively, for the RIPASA score [15]. A 2018 study from Nepal was able to arrive at 88.1% sensitivity and 28.8% specificity for the RIPASA score versus 68.6% sensitivity and 28.6% specificity for the MAS [16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

A Comparison of the Modified Alvarado Score and the Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (Ripasa) Score in a Southeast Asian Population With Histopathology as the Gold Standard

Mehbub,

Baig,

Khalid

et al. 2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe diagnosis of acute appendicitis has remained difficult despite it being one of the most common surgical emergencies in the world. One of the most frequently used scoring systems is the Modified Alvarado Score (MAS). However, the MAS has been known to be less efficient in Asian populations. To overcome this issue, the Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) score has been specifically developed to improve the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in Asian populations. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the RIPASA score compared to the MAS for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in a Southeast Asian population keeping histopathology as the gold standard. MethodologyThe study group comprised 150 patients. Data were collected from each patient using a simple proforma to ascertain both the MAS and the RIPASA score for each patient at the time of presentation. The patients then underwent open appendectomy and histopathology was used as the gold standard to determine the presence or absence of acute appendicitis in the excised specimens. ResultsThe RIPASA score had a sensitivity and specificity of 89.83% and 59.38%, respectively, compared to 64.41% and 53.12%, respectively, for the MAS. Diagnostic accuracy was similarly higher for the RIPASA score at 83.33% versus 62.00% for the MAS. ConclusionsThe RIPASA score is superior to the MAS for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Using the RIPASA score instead of the MAS in Southeast Asian populations can lead to a more accurate and timely clinical diagnosis of patients with suspected acute appendicitis and help improve patient outcomes.

show abstract

RIPASA vs Modified Alvarado Scoring System for diagnosis of Appendicitis

Cited by 2 publications

References 3 publications

A comparative study of RIPASA score and modified Alvarado score in diagnosis of acute appendicitis

A comparative study of RIPASA score and modified Alvarado score in diagnosis of acute appendicitis

A Comparison of the Modified Alvarado Score and the Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (Ripasa) Score in a Southeast Asian Population With Histopathology as the Gold Standard

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About