Sonography of paediatric appendicitis and its secondary signs

Sonographic diagnosis of appendicitis in children is an important clinical tool, often obviating the need for potentially harmful ionising radiation from computed tomography (CT) scans and unnecessary appendectomies. Established criteria do not commonly account for the sonographic secondary signs of acute appendicitis as an adjunct or corollary to an identifiably inflamed appendix. If one of, or combinations of these secondary signs are a reliable positive and/or negative indicator of the condition, diagnostic accuracy may be improved. This will be of particular importance in cases where the appendix cannot be easily identified, possibly providing referring clinicians with a less equivocal diagnosis. Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common emergency presentation requiring surgical intervention among both adults and children. During 2010-11 in Australia 25000 appendicectomies were performed on adults and children, more than double the number of the next most common surgical procedure [1]. Ultrasound has been commonly used to diagnose AA since the 1980s, however the best imaging modality or combination of modalities to accurately and cost-effectively diagnose the condition is still debated. A study by Puylaert advocated ultrasound in all presentations [2], whereas others suggested it only as a first line modality [3–5]. Conversely, York et al state that it is not appropriate as it delays treatment [6]. CT has been shown to more accurately diagnose AA than ultrasound, however its inherent radiation risks warrant cautionary use in children [7]. Improved accuracy in the diagnosis of suspected AA using ultrasound would enable surgeons to make a decision without the need to expose children to the potentially harmful effects of CT. Secondary signs of appendicitis are well established [8], although research into their predictive values has only recently been undertaken [9,10] indicating their potential diagnostic benefit in the absence of an identifiable appendix. The purpose of this review is to examine the history of appendiceal sonography, established sonographic criteria, paediatric specific techniques and the predictive value of secondary signs.

Scar outcome of children with partial thickness burns: A 3 and 6 month follow up

INTRODUCTION There is a paucity of research investigating the scar outcome of children with partial thickness burns. The aim of this study was to assess the scar outcome of children with partial thickness burns who received a silver dressing acutely. METHOD Children aged 0-15 years with an acute partial thickness burn, ≤10% TBSA were included. Children were originally recruited for an RCT investigating three dressings for partial thickness burns. Children were assessed at 3 and 6 months after re-epithelialization. 3D photographs were taken of the burn site, POSAS was completed and skin thickness was measured using ultrasound imaging. RESULTS Forty-three children returned for 3 and 6 month follow-ups or returned a photo. Days to re-epithelialization was a significant predictor of skin/scar quality at 3 and 6 months (p<0.01). Patient-rated color and observer-rated vascularity and pigmentation POSAS scores were comparable at 3 months (color vs. vascularity 0.88, p<0.001; color vs. pigmentation 0.64, p<0.001), but patients scored higher than the observer at 6 months (color vs. vascularity 0.57, p<0.05; color vs. pigmentation 0.15, p=0.60). Burn depth was significantly correlated with skin thickness (r=0.51, p<0.01). Hypopigmentation of the burn site was present in 25.8% of children who re-epithelialized in ≤2 weeks. CONCLUSION This study has provided information on outcomes for children with partial thickness burns and highlighted a need for further education of this population.