IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0136996.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Digital Rectal Examination for Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Toshihiko Takada
  • Hiroki Nishiwaki
  • Yosuke Yamamoto
  • Yoshinori Noguchi
  • Shingo Fukuma
  • Shin Yamazaki
  • Shunichi Fukuhara

Abstract

Background: Digital rectal examination (DRE) has been traditionally recommended to evaluate acute appendicitis, although several reports indicate its lack of utility for this diagnosis. No meta-analysis has examined DRE for diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Objectives: To assess the role of DRE for diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Data Sources: Cochrane Library, PubMed, and SCOPUS from the earliest available date of indexing through November 23, 2014, with no language restrictions. Study Selection: Clinical studies assessing DRE as an index test for diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent reviewers extracted study data and assessed the quality, using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. Bivariate random-effects models were used for the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) as point estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome measure was the diagnostic performance of DRE for diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Results: We identified 19 studies with a total of 7511 patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.49 (95% CI 0.42–0.56) and 0.61 (95% CI 0.53–0.67), respectively. The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 1.24 (95% CI 0.97–1.58) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.70–1.02), respectively. The DOR was 1.46 (0.95–2.26). Conclusion and Relevance: Acute appendicitis cannot be ruled in or out through the result of DRE. Reconsideration is needed for the traditional teaching that rectal examination should be performed routinely in all patients with suspected appendicitis.

Suggested Citation

  • Toshihiko Takada & Hiroki Nishiwaki & Yosuke Yamamoto & Yoshinori Noguchi & Shingo Fukuma & Shin Yamazaki & Shunichi Fukuhara, 2015. "The Role of Digital Rectal Examination for Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-13, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0136996
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0136996
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0136996&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0136996?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0136996. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.