A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN TZANAKIS SCORING SYSTEM AND ALVARADO SCORING SYSTEM IN DIAGNOSIS

Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergency, and its accurate diagnosis is crucial to prevent complications and reduce negative appendectomy rates. Clinical scoring systems, such as the Alvarado and Tzanakis scores, aid in diagnosis, but their comparative accuracy remains under evaluation. Aim: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the Tzanakis scoring system with the Alvarado scoring system in suspected acute appendicitis cases, using histopathology as the gold standard. Methods: This prospective, hospital-based study was conducted at a tertiary care center over one year and included 153 patients aged 11–60 years presenting with clinically suspected acute appendicitis. Both Tzanakis and Alvarado scores were calculated preoperatively. All patients underwent appendectomy, and histopathological examination confirmed the diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), diagnostic accuracy, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were performed for both scoring systems. Results: Tzanakis score ≥8 was observed in 83% of patients, while 69.9% had Alvarado score ≥7. Tzanakis demonstrated higher sensitivity (96.8%), specificity (75.9%), PPV (94.5%), NPV (84.6%), and diagnostic accuracy (92.8%) compared to Alvarado (77.4%, 62.1%, 89.7%, 39.1%, and 74.5%, respectively). ROC analysis showed AUC of 0.948 for Tzanakis versus 0.726 for Alvarado. Conclusion: The Tzanakis score outperforms the Alvarado score in diagnosing acute appendicitis and should be preferred when ultrasonography is available.

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2025-09-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17346935
Primary Topic
Appendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN TZANAKIS SCORING SYSTEM AND ALVARADO SCORING SYSTEM IN DIAGNOSIS

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Appendicitis Diagnosis and Management
article

A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN TZANAKIS SCORING SYSTEM AND ALVARADO SCORING SYSTEM IN DIAGNOSIS

article en

Abstract

Background: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergency, and its accurate diagnosis is crucial to prevent complications and reduce negative appendectomy rates. Clinical scoring systems, such as the Alvarado and Tzanakis scores, aid in diagnosis, but their comparative accuracy remains under evaluation. Aim: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the Tzanakis scoring system with the Alvarado scoring system in suspected acute appendicitis cases, using histopathology as the gold standard. Methods: This prospective, hospital-based study was conducted at a tertiary care center over one year and included 153 patients aged 11–60 years presenting with clinically suspected acute appendicitis. Both Tzanakis and Alvarado scores were calculated preoperatively. All patients underwent appendectomy, and histopathological examination confirmed the diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), diagnostic accuracy, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were performed for both scoring systems. Results: Tzanakis score ≥8 was observed in 83% of patients, while 69.9% had Alvarado score ≥7. Tzanakis demonstrated higher sensitivity (96.8%), specificity (75.9%), PPV (94.5%), NPV (84.6%), and diagnostic accuracy (92.8%) compared to Alvarado (77.4%, 62.1%, 89.7%, 39.1%, and 74.5%, respectively). ROC analysis showed AUC of 0.948 for Tzanakis versus 0.726 for Alvarado. Conclusion: The Tzanakis score outperforms the Alvarado score in diagnosing acute appendicitis and should be preferred when ultrasonography is available.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Openalex Percentile: Top 34%
Appendicitis Diagnosis and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.