This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
To the Editor.—I read with interest the article by Fee et al (Arch Surg 112:742-744, 1977) and fear it may discourage a useful diagnostic procedure.
Referring to this article, Fig 1 is a beautiful example of a "short" appendix and a "cut-off" sign virtually pathognomonic of appendicitis. I do not agree with the caption, which states it is normal. I agree that Fig 2 does appear normal. Figure 3 is difficult to analyze, but might have a foreshortened appendix or a nonopaque filling defect within it. Some of the difficulty here could be due to the use of a soluble contrast agent. We always recommend barium.
The results on the three patients in the study are interesting, but I question the interpretations. Also, three patients is hardly a "series." How often was a barium enema study utilized with beneficial results?
Actually, we are trying to answer that question with
SCHEY WL. Radiologic Diagnosis of Appendicitis. Arch Surg. 1977;112(9):1148. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1977.01370090130036
* * SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE * *
The JAMA Network Sites will be conducting routine maintenance from 10/20/2017 through 10/21/2017. During this window access to content and authentication may be intermittently available. The JAMA Store will be completely unavailable during the maintenance window.