Background: This study aimed to compare the differences of ultrasound findings between subhepatic appendicitis and appendicitis at a normal position, then discuss the diagnostic strategies and improve the accuracy of diagnosis.
Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed in our hospital. One thousand five hundred ninety-one patients with appendicitis were diagnosed from January 2014 to January 2018. Eighteen patients with subhepatic appendicitis and 25 patients with appendicitis with regular positions were selected randomly as the control group. The difference in ultrasound features between the two groups was studied. Comparisons between the two groups showed statistically significant differences in the frequencies of the fishbone sign, enlarged appendix, appendicoliths, and hyperechoic omental cap (P<0.05).
Results: Statistical significance was not observed with the difference in the frequency of whether there was lymphadenectasis (P>0.05) in the abdominal cavity between the two groups. The Pareto chart was drawn to look for the main factors associated. The results of interpretation on the critical points of diagnosis for subhepatic appendicitis: (I) the fishbone sign of a dilated ileum in the right lower abdomen; and (II) the fishbone sign of a dilated ileum in the right lower abdomen + presence of an enlarged appendix in the right upper abdomen.
Conclusions: An abnormally dilated ileum in the right lower abdomen - the fishbone sign, is a vital sign leading to the diagnosis of subhepatic appendicitis. The fishbone sign of a dilated ileum in the right lower abdomen + whether there is a vermiform structure is an important diagnostic indicator for subhepatic appendicitis.
Keywords: 20/80 rule; Subhepatic appendicitis; diagnostic strategy; hyperechoic omental cap; the Pareto principle; the fishbone sign.
2020 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.