European Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine

Background: Acute appendicitis is the most common surgically correctable cause of abdominal pain, the diagnosis of which remains difficult in many instances. Some of the signs and symptoms can be subtle to both clinician and the patient. also may not present in all instances. Arriving at the correct diagnosis is essential, however, a delay may allow progression to perforation and significantly increases morbidity and mortality. Incorrectly diagnosing a patient with appendicitis although not catastrophic, often subject the patient to an unnecessary operation. It has been claimed that diagnostic aids can dramatically reduce the number of appendectomies' in patients without appendicitis, the number of perforations, and the time spent in hospital. The methods advocated includes laparoscopy, scoring system, computer programs, ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Aims: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of RIPASA and MODIFIED ALVARADO SCORING SYSTEM in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Materials and Methods: We compared prospectively Ripasa and Modified Alvarado Scoring Systemby applyingb them to 94 patients. Bpth scores were calculated for patients who presented with right illiac fossa pain during the study period Depending of radiological evidence, appendicectomy was done. Post-operative hiztopathology report was correlated with the scores. A score of 7.5 is the optimal cut off threshold for RIPASA and 7 for Modified Alvarado Scoring system. The diagnostic accuracy of both the scoring system are compared. Results:-The RIPASA scoring system accurately diagnose 97.8% patients of high probability group (score greater than 7.5), whereas Modified Alvarado Scoring System accurately diagnose 91.4% patients of high probability group(score greater than 7). Conclusion:- RIPASA scoring system is more convenient, accurate, and specific scoring system for Indian population then Modified Alvarado Scoring System.