Spandidos Publications Logo
  • About
    • About Spandidos
    • Aims and Scopes
    • Abstracting and Indexing
    • Editorial Policies
    • Reprints and Permissions
    • Job Opportunities
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Contact
  • Journals
    • All Journals
    • Oncology Letters
      • Oncology Letters
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Oncology
      • International Journal of Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular and Clinical Oncology
      • Molecular and Clinical Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine
      • Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Molecular Medicine
      • International Journal of Molecular Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Biomedical Reports
      • Biomedical Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Oncology Reports
      • Oncology Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular Medicine Reports
      • Molecular Medicine Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • World Academy of Sciences Journal
      • World Academy of Sciences Journal
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Functional Nutrition
      • International Journal of Functional Nutrition
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Epigenetics
      • International Journal of Epigenetics
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Medicine International
      • Medicine International
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
  • Articles
  • Information
    • Information for Authors
    • Information for Reviewers
    • Information for Librarians
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Conferences
  • Language Editing
Spandidos Publications Logo
  • About
    • About Spandidos
    • Aims and Scopes
    • Abstracting and Indexing
    • Editorial Policies
    • Reprints and Permissions
    • Job Opportunities
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Contact
  • Journals
    • All Journals
    • Biomedical Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Epigenetics
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Functional Nutrition
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Molecular Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Medicine International
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular and Clinical Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular Medicine Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Oncology Letters
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Oncology Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • World Academy of Sciences Journal
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
  • Articles
  • Information
    • For Authors
    • For Reviewers
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Conferences
  • Language Editing
Login Register Submit
  • This site uses cookies
  • You can change your cookie settings at any time by following the instructions in our Cookie Policy. To find out more, you may read our Privacy Policy.

    I agree
Search articles by DOI, keyword, author or affiliation
Search
Advanced Search
presentation
Biomedical Reports
Join Editorial Board Propose a Special Issue
Print ISSN: 2049-9434 Online ISSN: 2049-9442
Journal Cover
May-2024 Volume 20 Issue 5

Full Size Image

Sign up for eToc alerts
Recommend to Library

Journals

International Journal of Molecular Medicine

International Journal of Molecular Medicine

International Journal of Molecular Medicine is an international journal devoted to molecular mechanisms of human disease.

International Journal of Oncology

International Journal of Oncology

International Journal of Oncology is an international journal devoted to oncology research and cancer treatment.

Molecular Medicine Reports

Molecular Medicine Reports

Covers molecular medicine topics such as pharmacology, pathology, genetics, neuroscience, infectious diseases, molecular cardiology, and molecular surgery.

Oncology Reports

Oncology Reports

Oncology Reports is an international journal devoted to fundamental and applied research in Oncology.

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine is an international journal devoted to laboratory and clinical medicine.

Oncology Letters

Oncology Letters

Oncology Letters is an international journal devoted to Experimental and Clinical Oncology.

Biomedical Reports

Biomedical Reports

Explores a wide range of biological and medical fields, including pharmacology, genetics, microbiology, neuroscience, and molecular cardiology.

Molecular and Clinical Oncology

Molecular and Clinical Oncology

International journal addressing all aspects of oncology research, from tumorigenesis and oncogenes to chemotherapy and metastasis.

World Academy of Sciences Journal

World Academy of Sciences Journal

Multidisciplinary open-access journal spanning biochemistry, genetics, neuroscience, environmental health, and synthetic biology.

International Journal of Functional Nutrition

International Journal of Functional Nutrition

Open-access journal combining biochemistry, pharmacology, immunology, and genetics to advance health through functional nutrition.

International Journal of Epigenetics

International Journal of Epigenetics

Publishes open-access research on using epigenetics to advance understanding and treatment of human disease.

Medicine International

Medicine International

An International Open Access Journal Devoted to General Medicine.

Journal Cover
May-2024 Volume 20 Issue 5

Full Size Image

Sign up for eToc alerts
Recommend to Library

  • Article
  • Citations
    • Cite This Article
    • Download Citation
    • Create Citation Alert
    • Remove Citation Alert
    • Cited By
  • Similar Articles
    • Related Articles (in Spandidos Publications)
    • Similar Articles (Google Scholar)
    • Similar Articles (PubMed)
  • Download PDF
  • Download XML
  • View XML
Article Open Access

Diagnostic value of laboratory parameters for complicated appendicitis: A two‑center study

  • Authors:
    • Qian Zhang
    • Hongwei Zhao
    • Fangli Wang
    • Wenqiang Li
    • Peng Zhang
  • View Affiliations / Copyright

    Affiliations: Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital, School of Clinical Medicine, Tsinghua University, Beijing 102218, P.R. China, Department of General Surgery, Aerospace Center Hospital, School of Clinical Medicine, Peking University, Beijing 100039, P.R. China
    Copyright: © Zhang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.
  • Article Number: 77
    |
    Published online on: March 15, 2024
       https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2024.1765
  • Expand metrics +
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

This article is mentioned in:



Abstract

There are two types of treatment for acute appendicitis (AA): surgery and antibiotic therapy. Some patients with complex appendicitis are treated with surgery; however, for uncomplex appendicitis, most could be treated effectively with antibiotics instead. How to distinguish complex appendicitis from uncomplex appendicitis before surgery is currently unknown. The present study aimed to assess the efficacy of the laboratory parameters to diagnose complicated appendicitis. Data from 1,514 cases with acute appendicitis who were admitted to Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital and Beijing Aerospace General Hospital (both Beijing, China) from January 2016 to September 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. All cases were divided into uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Independent variables were analyzed by uni‑ and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to identify significant parameters in the multivariate logistic regression analysis. Cut‑off values, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy with area under the curve (AUC)>0.600 were considered significant parameters. Significant differences were found in age (P<0.001), body temperature (P<0.001), white blood cell (WBC) count (P<0.001), C‑reactive protein (CRP; P<0.001), neutrophil count (P<0.001), neutrophil‑to‑lymphocyte ratio (NLR, P=0.019), platelet‑to‑lymphocyte ratio (PLR, P<0.001), platelet count (P<0.001), coefficient of variation (CV) and standard deviation (SD) of red blood cell distribution width (RDW); both P<0.001), mean platelet volume (MPV, P<0.001) and total (P<0.001) and direct bilirubin (P<0.001) between the two groups. CRP, neutrophil count, NLR, PLR, platelet count, RDW‑CV, RDW‑SD, MPV and direct bilirubin levels were found as the independent variables to diagnose complicated appendicitis. In patients with acute appendicitis, CRP >22.95 mg/l, NLR >5.7, serum direct bilirubin >6.1 mmol/l and RDW‑SD>17.7 fl were significantly associated with complicated appendicitis.

Introduction

Acute appendicitis is a frequently encountered acute abdominal condition, with a morbidity rate of 1.5-1.9 per 10 million (1,2). Its incidence is 1.4 times higher in men compared with that in women (1). Lifetime risk of experiencing acute appendicitis is 7-8% (1). Elderly patients have higher incidence of complicated appendicitis, reported rates of perforation and morbidity were as high as 70 and 48%, respectively (3). Notably, 17-30% of patients with acute appendicitis may exhibit appendiceal perforation; this occurrence is notably more prevalent in the elderly (1,2). Appendicitis is divided into uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis according to its pathology (4). Uncomplicated appendicitis has a mild infection and fewer complications and can be treated with antibiotics (5). On the other hand, surgery is the primary treatment for complicated appendicitis (5). Early diagnosis and management are crucial to decrease incidence of complications and the length of hospitalization (4,5).

Several diagnostic modalities are available for appendicitis, such as laboratory inflammatory markers, scoring systems and imaging methods (6,7). Only 60% of patients present with typical symptoms, including shifting right lower abdominal pain, fever, nausea, and vomiting (1,2,8). The frequently measured laboratory parameters are C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell (WBC) count and neutrophil percentage. However, these tests can only evaluate the presence of abdominal infection and severity (1,7,9,10). Abdominal ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) scan are used in the diagnosis of appendicitis. Sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound are 86 and 81%, respectively, due to the influence of the intestinal gas (4,11). Although non-contrast-enhanced CT has better sensitivity and specificity (92.3%) than ultrasound (81%) (1,12,13), the high cost and the risk of radiation may limit its broad application. Therefore, evaluation of acute appendicitis based on laboratory tests is essential.

Over the past decade, studies have reported that neutrophil count and percentage, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet (PLT) count, mean platelet volume (MPV) and direct bilirubin are key parameters in the diagnosis of appendicitis and predicting the complications (1,14-19). A recent study demonstrated an association between plasma sodium concentration ≤135 mmol/l and perforated appendicitis (5). The present study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of CRP, WBC count, NLR, PLT, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), red blood cell distribution width (RDW), MPV and serum bilirubin levels for acute appendicitis. The present study aimed to propose a standard was for the management of acute appendicitis.

Materials and methods

Study design and participant selection

The present study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital (Beijing, China; approval no. 22029-1-01). Because of the retrospective nature of the study, the requirement for patient consent for inclusion was waived. Data from 1,514 cases with acute appendicitis who were admitted to the Gastrointestinal Department of Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital (n=978; 64.6%) and Surgery Department of Beijing Aerospace General Hospital (Beijing, China; n=536; 35.4%) from January 2016 to September 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The inclusion criteria were as follows: i) Age ≥14 years and ii) pathological confirmation of acute appendicitis. The exclusion criteria were as follows: i) Postoperative pathology indicating a normal appendix; ii) concurrent autoimmune or infectious diseases of non-appendiceal origin; iii) concurrent severe liver, cardiovascular or kidney diseases; iv) concurrent cancer or other blood related diseases and v) antibiotic treatment <12 h before the surgery and blood test.

Blood test was performed <12 h before the surgery. Flow cytometry was used to detect blood cell composition and hydraulic focusing method (Automated Hematology Systems XN, Automated Hematology Analyzer XN series XN master, flow cell count + DNA/RNA fluorescence staining) was used for the complete blood count and blood chemistry tests. Additionally, liver function test was conducted using diazonium salt method (BECKMAN COULTER CHEMISTRY ANALYZER AU5800 Serie, Beckman Coulter AU5800 software, B000017AA, Beckman Coulter). All the cases underwent laparoscopic appendectomy.

Appendix pathology was evaluated by an experienced pathologist from each hospital. The pathological results were classified as follows: Simple/phlegmonous (intraoperative signs of congestion, an increased diameter, red) color change, exudate or pus; or histopathologic signs of transmural inflammation, ulceration, or thrombosis, with or without extramural pus), gangrenous and perforated (perioperative signs of a friable appendix with purple, green or black color changes, a visible perforation, and/or abscess formation, or histopathologic signs of transmural inflammation with signs of necrosis or perforation) appendicitis (20). Subsequently, all cases were categorized into two groups: Uncomplicated, comprising simple and phlegmonous appendicitis, and complicated appendicitis, encompassing gangrenous and perforated appendicitis and periappendicular abscess.

Data collection

The information of age, sex and body temperature was retrieved from the medical records. Routine blood tests provided data on WCC, CRP, MPV, neutrophil count and percentage, platelet (PLT), lymphocyte count and coefficient of variation (CV) and standard deviation (SD) of RDW. Liver function test yielded values for total and direct bilirubin and CRP. NLR was calculated as the ratio of neutrophil count to lymphocyte count, LMR as the ratio of lymphocyte count to monocyte count and PLR as the ratio of platelet count to lymphocyte count.

The primary outcomes of the study included the values of WCC, CRP, MPV, neutrophil count and percentage, lymphocyte count, RDW-CV and RDW-SD. The secondary outcomes were values of total and direct bilirubin, CRP, NLR, LMR and PLR.

Statistical analysis

The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 25.0 software (IBM Corp.). Normally distributed continuous variables are expressed as mean ± SD and compared using unpaired t test. Abnormally distributed continuous variables are presented as median and compared using the Kruskal-Wallis H test. Numerical data were expressed as number and percentage and compared using χ2 test. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted on parameters exhibiting significant differences in the univariate analysis. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The appropriate cut-off values were identified and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) were calculated for parameters with an area under the curve (AUC)>0.600. All tests were two-sided. P<0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference.

Results

The cohort comprised 780 (51.5%) men and 734 (48.5%) women with a mean age of 36.000±15.135 (range, 14-88) years. A total of 1,172 (77.4%) cases were allocated to the uncomplicated appendicitis group, while 342 (22.6%) cases were in the complicated appendicitis group. Age, body temperature, WCC, CRP, neutrophil percentage and count, NLR, PLR, PLT, RDW-CV, RDW-SD, MPV, total bilirubin and direct bilirubin exhibited significant differences (all P<0.001) between the two groups as evidenced by univariate analysis (Table I).

Table I

Univariate analysis.

Table I

Univariate analysis.

VariableUncomplicated appendicitisComplicated appendicitisP-value
N1,172342 
Median age (range), years35 (14-81)41 (16-88)<0.001
Sex (%)  0.868
     Male606 (51.70)174 (50.90) 
     Female566 (48.30)168 (49.10) 
Mean body temperature, ˚C37.0±0.7037.50±0.93<0.001
Mean WBC count, x109/l13.0±3.9214.24±3.98<0.001
Mean CRP, mg/l10.18±50.843.29±74.41<0.001
Mean neutrophil, %84.40±9.4086.20±7.73<0.001
Mean neutrophil count, x109/l10.79±3.9312.17±3.67<0.001
Mean NLR8.21±8.369.95±11.88<0.001
Mean LMR2.43±3.121.87±3.430.919
Mean PLR‡167.53±200.27191.43±374.31<0.001
Mean PLT, x109/l222.50±57.46225.50±58.21<0.001
Mean RDW-CV, %11.90±1.5512.10±1.36<0.0001
Mean RDW-SD, fl37.40±12.638.50±10.56<0.001
MPV, fl10.30±14.2810.10±11.80<0.001
Mean bilirubin, mmol/l14.60±8.7817.95±10.78<0.001
Mean direct bilirubin, mmol/l4.24±2.65.80±3.80<0.001

[i] WBC, white blood cell; CRP, C-reactive protein; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; LMR, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio; PLR, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; PLT, platelet count; RDW, red blood cell distribution width; MPV, mean platelet volume; CV, coefficient of variation.

Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that CRP (P<0.001), neutrophil count (P<0.001), NLR (P=0.019), PLR (P<0.001), PLT (P<0.001), RDW-CV (P=0.045), RDW-SD (P<0.001), MPV (P=0.007) and direct bilirubin (P<0.001) were the independent risk factors associated with complicated appendicitis (Table II). According to ROC curve analysis, factors with AUC>0.600 were CRP, NLR, RDW-SD and direct bilirubin (all P<0.001; Table II). The cut-off values of CRP, NLR, RDW-SD and direct bilirubin are presented in Table III.

Table II

Logistic regression and ROC curve in factors associated with complicated appendicitis.

Table II

Logistic regression and ROC curve in factors associated with complicated appendicitis.

 Multivariate analysisROC curve analysis
VariableOR95% CIP-valueAUC95% CIP-value
CRP1.0081.005-1.010<0.0010.6790.642-0.714<0.001
Neutrophil count1.1201.055-1.189<0.0010.5890.556-0.621<0.001
NLR0.9440.900-0.9910.0190.6030.556-0.621<0.001
PLR1.0051.003-1.008<0.0010.5730.537-0.607<0.001
PLT0.9960.993-1.0000.0390.5020.466-0.535<0.001
RDW-CV0.8090.657-0.9960.0450.5790.544-0.610<0.001
RDW-SD1.1471.079-1.219<0.0010.6050.571-0.637<0.001
MPV1.0671.018-1.1180.0070.5670.535-0.601<0.001
Direct bilirubin1.1281.075-1.184<0.0010.6570.622-0.690<0.001

[i] OR, odds ratio; AUC, area under the curve; CRP, C-reactive protein; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; PLR, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; PLT, platelet; RDW, red blood cell distribution width; MPV, mean platelet volume; CV, coefficient of variation.

Table III

Proposed cut-off values for significant parameters in prediction of acute complicated appendicitis.

Table III

Proposed cut-off values for significant parameters in prediction of acute complicated appendicitis.

VariableCut-off valueSensitivity, %Specificity, %PPVNPVpLLRnLLRAUC
CRP22.9564.2466.0938.1085.001.890.540.679
NLR5.782.4632.5126.3086.401.220.540.603
RDW-SD17.782.1633.4526.5086.501.230.530.605
Direct bilirubin6.147.6678.1638.9083.702.180.670.657

[i] PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; OR, odds ratio; pLLR, positive likelihood ratio; nLLR, negative likelihood ratio; AUC, area under the curve; CRP, C-reactive protein; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; RDW, red blood cell distribution width.

Discussion

Acute appendicitis is the prevailing cause of acute abdominal conditions, with morbidity rates up to 2% (1,21). The diagnosis of appendicitis depends on symptoms, signs, laboratory tests and imaging results (1,7,8). Surgery is the primary therapy for acute appendicitis, especially for complicated appendicitis (22-25). Complicated appendicitis accounts for 18-34% of acute appendicitis cases (1). Conservative treatment is the first option for uncomplicated appendicitis (1,7,8,26). Therefore, it is necessary to choose an effective and simple method to distinguish complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis. Parameters such as temperature, CRP, WBC, NLR, PLR, MPV, RDW-CV, RDW-SD and total bilirubin may improve the diagnostic accuracy for complicated appendicitis, however, the efficacy varies (10,16-19,21,27-29). The present study analyzed 1,514 cases who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy at two surgical centers. The results suggested that CRP, neutrophil, NLR, PLR, PLT, RDW-CV, RDW-SD, MPV and direct bilirubin could be the independent risk factors of complicated appendicitis.

CRP is a serum inflammatory marker and a critical factor associated with complicated appendicitis (16,19,30). Its concentration increases rapidly by several-fold in the early stage of inflammation (6-12 h) (31). Notably, WBC count is a sensitive indicator during the first 24 h of acute appendicitis, while CRP is sensitive after the first 24 h (31). Ahmed (32) reported that the probability of appendix perforation significantly increases when CRP >48 mg/dl. A study including 42 acute appendicitis cases found that the sensitivity and specificity of perforated appendicitis are 71 and 100%, respectively, when CRP is >40.1 mg/dl (33). Choudhary et al (34) demonstrated that the sensitivity and specificity of perforated appendicitis are 100 and 54%, respectively, when CRP is >6.15 mg/l. Hence, the appropriate cut-off of CRP is key for distinguishing complicated appendicitis. The present study found that the sensitivity and specificity of complicated appendicitis were 64.24 and 66.09%, respectively, when CRP was >22.95 mg/l. This cut-off value was lower than that reported in previous studies (32,33).

NLR is obtained from complete blood count. It is a routine and cost-effective blood test during diagnosis of appendicitis. NLR can effectively elucidate the severity of acute appendicitis (18,27,28,35,36), while the cut-off value remains controversial (27,28,35,36). Ishizuka et al (14) reported that NLR of 8.0 is significantly associated with gangrenous appendicitis based on the analysis of 314 cases who underwent appendectomy. Kahramanca et al (15) analyzed 897 cases and concluded that NLR of 5.74 is associated with complicated appendicitis; sensitivity and specificity of clinical features were 70.8 and 48.5%, respectively. The present study reported an NLR of 5.7 associated with complicated appendicitis and the sensitivity and specificity were 82.46 and 32.51%, respectively. This finding was similar to that of Kahramanca et al (15) and lower than that reported by Ishizuka et al (14). Prior research (14) suggests that the lower the cut-off value of NLR, the higher the sensitivity of NLR. Cut-off value of 3.5 results in the highest sensitivity (35) and the specificity increases when NLR >5.0(21). Further investigation with a larger sample size is essential to find an optimal cut-off value of NLR.

The serum bilirubin levels increase due to liver dysfunction during infection, especially sepsis. Hence, serum bilirubin levels are included in the evaluation of patients with complicated appendicitis (37-39). The sensitivity and specificity of total and direct bilirubin in recognizing complicated appendicitis are 48 and 61%, respectively (40). Sand et al (41) reported that hyperbilirubinemia has a specificity of 86% for appendiceal perforation or gangrene, while CRP has a specificity of 35%. Estrada et al (42) found that bilirubin levels >1 mg/dl are associated with three-fold risk of perforated appendicitis. Pogorelić et al (43) demonstrated that hyperbilirubinemia is a reliable indicator for perforated acute appendicitis in children with sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 77.3%. By contrast, certain studies have reported no diagnostic value for bilirubin in the prediction of perforated appendicitis (44,45). Bilirubin alone is sufficient to identify patients with acute appendicitis and predict perforated appendicitis. The value of bilirubin as a marker increases when combined with clinical symptoms and other blood markers (44,46). In the present study, total and direct bilirubin levels were significantly elevated in the complicated appendicitis group. Direct bilirubin was an independent risk factor of complicated appendicitis with a sensitivity of 47.66% and specificity of 78.16% when the cut-off value was 6.1 mmol/l. Although total bilirubin levels can be measured, few studies have reported the efficiency of direct bilirubin (44-46). Therefore, these results need to be verified with further studies.

RDW reflects volumetric heterogeneity of red blood cells. At present, it is primarily used for the differential diagnosis of anemia (47,48). RDW is altered in certain types of inflammatory and infectious disease, such as inflammatory bowel disease, celiac disease, acute pancreatitis, rheumatoid arthritis, bacteremia, sepsis and septic shock (47-51). Previous studies have reported a strong correlation between RDW and inflammatory markers, such as CRP, erythrocyte sedimentation rate and interleukin-6 (48,49). The inflammatory mediators affect survival of red blood cells in the circulation by suppressing erythrocyte maturation. Thus, newer, larger reticulocytes enter peripheral circulation and increase the RDW (48). Narci et al (52) found that RDW significantly decreases in patients with acute appendicitis compared with healthy individuals. Conversely, Aktimur et al (53) and Tanrikulu et al (54) did not identify any diagnostic value of RDW in acute appendicitis. Jung et al (55) demonstrated that the RDW is significantly higher in complicated appendicitis compared with that in the uncomplicated appendicitis; by contrast, RDW does not significantly differ between patients with appendicitis and healthy individuals. A recent meta-analysis, which included 5,222 cases, showed that RDW does not differentiate patients with acute appendicitis from healthy individuals (56) and highlighted the lack of evidence for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis using RDW. The results of the present study indicated that RDW-CV and RDW-SD were independent risk factors for complicated appendicitis. RDW-SD had a sensitivity of 82.16% and specificity of 33.45% for complicated appendicitis when the cut-off value was 17.7 fl. Therefore, RDW could serve as a parameter to identify complicated appendicitis.

Although the present multicenter study indicated CRP, NLR, direct bilirubin and RDW-SD as potential biomarkers for complicated appendicitis, the retrospective nature of the analysis may introduce the possibility of bias. Therefore, randomized controlled trials should be conducted. Moreover, the present study only assessed laboratory results. In the future, physical examination should also be included to improve sensitivity and specificity.

In conclusion, elevated levels of CRP (>22.95 mg/l), NLR (>5.7), RDW-SD (>17.7 fl) and direct bilirubin (>6.1 mmol/l) could serve as valuable indicators for diagnosing acute complicated appendicitis. For patients exhibiting these indicators, surgery is the primary recommended treatment.

Acknowledgements

Not appliable.

Funding

Funding: No funding was received.

Availability of data and materials

The data generated in the present study are included in the figures and/or tables of this article.

Authors' contributions

QZ, HWZ and WQL designed the study, analyzed data and wrote the manuscript. FW and PZ reviewed the manuscript and analyzed and interpreted data. QZ, HWZ, and WQL confirm the authenticity of all the raw data. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital (Beijing, China approval no. 22029-1-01). The requirement for informed consent was waived due to the retrospective nature of the study.

Patient consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

1 

Baird DLH, Simillis C, Kontovounisios C, Rasheed S and Tekkis PP: Acute appendicitis. BMJ. 357(j1703)2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

2 

Pogorelić Z, Mihanović J, Ninčević S, Lukšić B, Elezović Baloević S and Polašek O: Validity of appendicitis inflammatory response score in distinguishing perforated from non-perforated appendicitis in children. Children (Basel). 8(309)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

3 

Weinandt M, Godiris-Petit G, Menegaux F, Chereau N and Lupinacci RM: Appendicitis is a severe disease in elderly patients: A twenty-year audit. JSLS. 24(e2020.00046)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

4 

Bhangu A, Søreide K, Di Saverio S, Assarsson JH and Drake FT: Acute appendicitis: Modern understanding of pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management. Lancet. 386:1278–1287. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

5 

Pogorelić Z, Lukšić B, Ninčević S, Lukšić B and Polašek O: Hyponatremia as a predictor of perforated acute appendicitis in pediatric population: A prospective study. J Pediatr Surg. 56:1816–1821. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

6 

Rafiq MS, Khan MM, Khan A and Ahmad B: Total leukocyte and neutrophil count as preventive tools in reducing negative appendectomies. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 21:102–106. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

7 

Ünal Y: A new and early marker in the diagnosis of acute complicated appendicitis: Immature granulocytes. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 24:434–439. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

8 

Andersson REB: Meta-analysis of the clinical and laboratory diagnosis of appendicitis. Br J Surg. 91:28–37. 2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

9 

Di Saverio S, Birindelli A, Kelly MD, Catena F, Weber DG, Sartelli M, Sugrue M, De Moya M, Gomes CA, Bhangu A, et al: WSES Jerusalem guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis. World J Emerg Surg. 11(34)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

10 

Farooqui W, Pommergaard HC, Burcharth J and Eriksen JR: Platelet-to-Lymphocyte ratios be favourable predictors for the differential diagnosis of appendicitis? J Pak Med Assoc. 69:647–654. 2019.PubMed/NCBI

11 

Peixoto Rde O, Nunes TA and Gomes CA: Indices of diagnostic abdominal ultrasonography in acute appendicitis: Influence of gender and physical constitution, time evolution of the disease and experience of radiologist. Rev Col Bras Cir. 38:105–111. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar : (In English, Portuguese).

12 

Ramalingam V, Bates DD, Buch K, Uyeda J, Zhao KM, Storer LA, Roberts MB, Lebedis CA, Soto JA and Anderson SW: Diagnosing acute appendicitis using a nonoral contrast CT protocol in patients with a BMI of less than 25. Emerg Radiol. 23:455–462. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

13 

Nielsen JW, Boomer L, Kurtovic K, Lee E, Kupzyk K, Mallory R, Adler B, Bates DG and Kenney B: Reducing computed tomography scans for appendicitis by introduction of a standardized and validated ultrasonography report template. J Pediatr Surg. 50:144–148. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

14 

Ishizuka M, Shimizu T and Kubota K: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio has a close association with gangrenous appendicitis in patients undergoing appendectomy. Int Surg. 97:299–304. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

15 

Kahramanca S, Ozgehan G, Seker D, Gökce EI, Seker G, Tunç G, Küçükpınar T and Kargıcı H: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as a predictor of acute appendicitis. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 20:19–22. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

16 

Shimoda M, Maruyama T, Nishida K, Suzuki K, Tago T, Shimazaki J and Suzuki S: Preoperative high C-reactive protein level is associated with an increased likelihood for conversion from laparoscopic to open appendectomy in patients with acute appendicitis. Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 12:141–147. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

17 

Haghi AR, Pourmohammad P and Rabiee MAS: Accuracy of mean platelet volume (MPV) and red cell distribution width (RDW) for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: Evaluation of possible new biomarkers. Adv J Emerg Med. 4(e20)2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

18 

Hajibandeh S, Hajibandeh S, Hobbs N and Mansour M: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio predicts acute appendicitis and distinguishes between complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg. 219:154–163. 2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

19 

Özozan ÖV and Vural V: High C-reactive protein level as a predictor for appendiceal perforation. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 26:63–66. 2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

20 

Nijssen DJ, van Amstel P, van Schuppen J, Eeftinck Schattenkerk LD, Gorter RR and Bakx R: Accuracy of ultrasonography for differentiating between simple and complex appendicitis in children. Pediatr Surg Int. 37:843–849. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

21 

Sevinç MM, Kınacı E, Çakar E, Bayrak S, Özakay A, Aren A and Sari S: Diagnostic value of basic laboratory parameters for simple and perforated acute appendicitis: An analysis of 3392 cases. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 22:155–162. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

22 

Phillips AW, Jones AE and Sargen K: Should the macroscopically normal appendix be removed during laparoscopy for acute right iliac fossa pain when no other explanatory pathology is found? Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 19:392–394. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

23 

Gaitán HG, Reveiz L, Farquhar C and Elias VM: Laparoscopy for the management of acute lower abdominal pain in women of childbearing age. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014(CD007683)2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

24 

Lee M, Paavana T, Mazari F and Wilson TR: The morbidity of negative appendicectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 96:517–520. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

25 

Slotboom T, Hamminga JT, Hofker HS, Heineman E and Haveman JW: Apple Study Group Appendicitis and Laparoscopic Evaluation. Intraoperative motive for performing a laparoscopic appendectomy on a postoperative histological proven normal appendix. Scand J Surg. 103:245–248. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

26 

Xu H, Yang S, Xing J, Wang Y, Sun W, Rong L and Liu H: Comparison of the efficacy and safety of antibiotic treatment and appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Surg. 23(208)2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

27 

Pehlivanli F and Aydin O: Role of platelet to lymphocyte ratio as a biomedical marker for the pre-operative diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 20:631–636. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

28 

Ahmad KA, Ideris N and Aziz SHSA: A cross-sectional study of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in diagnosing acute appendicitis in Hospital Melaka. Malays J Med Sci. 26:55–66. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

29 

Boshnak N, Boshnaq M and Elgohary H: Evaluation of platelet indices and red cell distribution width as new biomarkers for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. J Invest Surg. 31:121–129. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

30 

Bayrak S, Tatar C, Cakar E, Colak S, Gunes ME, Tekesin K, Gurbulak B, Kinaci E and Sevinc MM: Evaluation of the predictive power of laboratory markers in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in the elderly. North Clin Istanb. 6:293–301. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

31 

Çetinkaya E, Erdoğan A, Akgül Ö, Çelik C and Tez M: High serum cancer antigen 125 level indicates perforation in acute appendicitis. Am J Emerg Med. 33:1465–1467. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

32 

Ahmed N: C-reactive protein: An aid for diagnosis of acute appendicitis. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 29:250–253. 2017.PubMed/NCBI

33 

Lai CY, Leung YK and Graham CA: Could C-reactive protein be a potential biomarker of complicated acute appendicitis? Hong Kong J Emerg Med. 21:354–360. 2014.

34 

Choudhary SK, Yadav BL, Gupta S, Kumar N, Bansal S and Verma PK: Diagnostic value of C-reactive protein as a predictor of complicated appendicitis like perforated/gangrenous appendicitis. Int Surg J. 6(1761)2019.

35 

Yazar FM, Urfalioglu A, Bakacak M, Boran OF and Bülbüloğlu E: Efficacy of the evaluation of inflammatory markers for the reduction of negative appendectomy rates. Indian J Surg. 80:61–67. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

36 

Celik B, Nalcacioglu H, Ozcatal M and Altuner Torun Y: Role of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio in identifying complicated appendicitis in the pediatric emergency department. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 25:222–228. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

37 

Brienza N, Dalfino L, Cinnella G, Diele C, Bruno F and Fiore T: Jaundice in critical illness: promoting factors of a concealed reality. Intensive Care Med. 32:267–274. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

38 

Emmanuel A, Murchan P, Wilson I and Balfe P: The value of hyperbilirubinaemia in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 93:213–217. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

39 

Hong YR, Chung CW, Kim JW, Kwon CI, Ahn DH, Kwon SW and Kim SK: Hyperbilirubinemia is a significant indicator for the severity of acute appendicitis. J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 28:247–252. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

40 

Motie MR, Nik MM and Gharaee M: Evaluation of the diagnostic value of serum level of total bilirubin in patients with suspected acute appendicitis. Electron Physician. 9:4048–4054. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

41 

Sand M, Bechara FG, Holland-Letz T, Sand D, Mehnert G and Mann B: . Diagnostic value of hyperbilirubinemia as a predictive factor for appendiceal perforation in acute appendicitis. Am J Surg. 198:193–198. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

42 

Estrada JJ, Petrosyan M, Barnhart J, Tao M, Sohn H, Towfigh S and Mason RJ: Hyperbilirubinemia in appendicitis: A new predictor of perforation. J Gastrointest Surg. 11:714–718. 2007.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

43 

Pogorelić Z, Lukšić AM, Mihanović J, Đikić D and Balta V: Hyperbilirubinemia as an indicator of perforated acute appendicitis in pediatric population: A prospective study. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 22:1064–1071. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

44 

Panagiotopoulou IG, Parashar D, Lin R, Antonowicz S, Wells AD, Bajwa FM and Krijgsman B: The diagnostic value of white cell count, C-reactive protein and bilirubin in acute appendicitis and its complications. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 95:215–221. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

45 

Beltran MA, Mendez PE, Barrera RE, Contreras MA, Wilson CS, Cortes VJ and Cruces KS: Is hyperbilirubinaemia in appendicitis a better predictor of perforation than C-reactive protein?-a prospective study. Indian J Surg. 71:265–272. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

46 

Giordano S, Pääkkönen M, Salminen P and Grönroos JM: Elevated serum bilirubin in assessing the likelihood of perforation in acute appendicitis: A diagnostic meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 11:795–800. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

47 

Ku NS, Kim HW, Oh HJ, Kim YC, Kim MH, Song JE, Oh DH, Ahn JY, Kim SB, Jeong SJ, et al: Red blood cell distribution width is an independent predictor of mortality in patients with gram-negative bacteremia. Shock. 38:123–127. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

48 

Lippi G, Targher G, Montagnana M, Salvagno GL, Zoppini G and Guidi GC: Relation between red blood cell distribution width and inflammatory biomarkers in a large cohort of unselected outpatients. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 133:628–632. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

49 

Şenol K, Saylam B, Kocaay F and Tez M: Red cell distribution width as a predictor of mortality in acute pancreatitis. Am J Emerg Med. 31:687–689. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

50 

Sadaka F, O'Brien J and Prakash S: Red cell distribution width and outcome in patients with septic shock. J Intensive Care Med. 28:307–313. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

51 

Harmanci O, Kav T and Sivri B: Red cell distribution width can predict intestinal atrophy in selected patients with celiac disease. J Clin Lab Anal. 26:497–502. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

52 

Narci H, Turk E, Karagulle E, Togan T and Karabulut K: The role of red cell distribution width in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: A retrospective case-controlled study. World J Emerg Surg. 8(46)2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

53 

Aktimur R, Cetinkunar S, Yildirim K, Ozdas S, Aktimur SH and Gokakin AK: Mean Platelet Volume is a Significant Biomarker in the Differential Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 19:484–489. 2015.

54 

Tanrikulu CS, Tanrikulu Y, Sabuncuoglu MZ, Karamercan MA, Akkapulu N and Coskun F: Mean platelet volume and red cell distribution width as a diagnostic marker in acute appendicitis. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 16(e10211)2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

55 

Jung SK, Rhee DY, Lee WJ, Woo SH, Seol SH, Kim DH and Choi SP: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte count ratio is associated with perforated appendicitis in elderly patients of emergency department. Aging Clin Exp Res. 29:529–536. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

56 

Anand S, Krishnan N, Jukić M, Križanac Z, Llorente Muñoz CM and Pogorelić Z: Utility of red cell distribution width (RDW) as a noninvasive biomarker for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 5222 cases. Diagnostics (Basel). 12(1011)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

Related Articles

  • Abstract
  • View
  • Download
  • Twitter
Copy and paste a formatted citation
Spandidos Publications style
Zhang Q, Zhao H, Wang F, Li W and Zhang P: Diagnostic value of laboratory parameters for complicated appendicitis: A two‑center study. Biomed Rep 20: 77, 2024.
APA
Zhang, Q., Zhao, H., Wang, F., Li, W., & Zhang, P. (2024). Diagnostic value of laboratory parameters for complicated appendicitis: A two‑center study. Biomedical Reports, 20, 77. https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2024.1765
MLA
Zhang, Q., Zhao, H., Wang, F., Li, W., Zhang, P."Diagnostic value of laboratory parameters for complicated appendicitis: A two‑center study". Biomedical Reports 20.5 (2024): 77.
Chicago
Zhang, Q., Zhao, H., Wang, F., Li, W., Zhang, P."Diagnostic value of laboratory parameters for complicated appendicitis: A two‑center study". Biomedical Reports 20, no. 5 (2024): 77. https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2024.1765
Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Zhang Q, Zhao H, Wang F, Li W and Zhang P: Diagnostic value of laboratory parameters for complicated appendicitis: A two‑center study. Biomed Rep 20: 77, 2024.
APA
Zhang, Q., Zhao, H., Wang, F., Li, W., & Zhang, P. (2024). Diagnostic value of laboratory parameters for complicated appendicitis: A two‑center study. Biomedical Reports, 20, 77. https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2024.1765
MLA
Zhang, Q., Zhao, H., Wang, F., Li, W., Zhang, P."Diagnostic value of laboratory parameters for complicated appendicitis: A two‑center study". Biomedical Reports 20.5 (2024): 77.
Chicago
Zhang, Q., Zhao, H., Wang, F., Li, W., Zhang, P."Diagnostic value of laboratory parameters for complicated appendicitis: A two‑center study". Biomedical Reports 20, no. 5 (2024): 77. https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2024.1765
Follow us
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
About
  • Spandidos Publications
  • Careers
  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
How can we help?
  • Help
  • Live Chat
  • Contact
  • Email to our Support Team