Skip to main content
Log in

Perforated appendicitis: an underappreciated mimic of intussusception on ultrasound

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

We encountered multiple cases in which the US appearance of ruptured appendicitis mimicked intussusception, resulting in diagnostic and therapeutic delay and multiple additional imaging studies.

Objective

To explore the clinical and imaging discriminatory features between the conditions.

Materials and methods

Initial US images in six children (age 16 months to 8 years; 4 boys, 2 girls) were reviewed independently and by consensus by three pediatric radiologists. These findings were compared and correlated with the original reports and subsequent US, fluoroscopic, and CT images and reports.

Results

All initial US studies demonstrated a multiple-ring-like appearance (target sign, most apparent on transverse views) with diagnostic consensus supportive of intussusception. In three cases, US findings were somewhat discrepant with clinical concerns. Subsequently, four of the six children had contrast enemas; two were thought to have partial or complete intussusception reduction. Three had a repeat US examination, with recognition of the correct diagnosis. None of the US examinations demonstrated definite intralesional lymph nodes or mesenteric fat, but central echogenicity caused by debris/appendicolith was misinterpreted as fat. All showed perilesional hyperechogenicity that, in retrospect, represented inflamed fat “walling off” of the perforated appendix. There were four CTs, all of which demonstrated a double-ring appearance that correlated with the US target appearance, with inner and outer rings representing the dilated appendix and walled-off appendiceal rupture, respectively. All six children had surgical confirmation of perforated appendicitis.

Conclusion

Contained perforated appendicitis can produce US findings closely mimicking intussusception. Clinical correlation and careful multiplanar evaluation should allow for sonographic suspicion of perforated appendicitis, which can be confirmed on CT if necessary.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cogley JR, O’Connor SC, Houshyar R et al (2012) Emergent pediatric US: what every radiologist should know. Radiographics 32:651–665

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson DR (1999) The pseudokidney sign. Radiology 211:395–397

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Del-Pozo G, Albillos JC, Tejedor D (1996) Intussusception: US findings with pathologic correlation—the crescent-in-doughnut sign. Radiology 199:688–692

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sivit CJ (1993) Diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children: spectrum of sonographic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 161:147–152

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Daneman A, Navarro O (2003) Intussusception. Part 1: a review of diagnostic approaches. Pediatr Radiol 33:79–85

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Van Breda Vriesman AC, Puylaert JB (2006) Mimics of appendicitis: alternative nonsurgical diagnoses with sonography and CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1103–1112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Krishnamoorthi R, Ramarajan N, Wang NE et al (2011) Effectiveness of a staged US and CT protocol for the diagnosis of pediatric appendicitis: reducing radiation exposure in the age of ALARA. Radiology 259:231–239

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Williams H (2008) Imaging and intussusception. Arch Dis Child Educ Pract Ed 93:30–36

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ko SF, Lee TY, Ng SH et al (2002) Small bowel intussusception in symptomatic pediatric patients: experiences with 19 surgically proven cases. World J Surg 26:438–443

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lioubashevsky N, Hiller N, Rozovsky K et al (2013) Ileocolic versus small-bowel intussusception in children: can US enable reliable differentiation? Radiology 269:266–271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tejani C, Phatak T, Sivitz A (2012) Right lower-quadrant pain—more than one diagnosis. Pediatr Emerg Care 28:1224–1226

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Christianakis E, Sakelaropoulos A, Papantzimas C et al (2008) Pelvic plastron secondary to acute appendicitis in a child presented as appendiceal intussusception. A case report. Cases J 1:135

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dietz KR, Merrow AC, Podberesky DJ et al (2013) Beyond acute appendicitis: imaging of additional pathologies of the pediatric appendix. Pediatr Radiol 43:232–242, quiz 259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Beverley Newman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Newman, B., Schmitz, M., Gawande, R. et al. Perforated appendicitis: an underappreciated mimic of intussusception on ultrasound. Pediatr Radiol 44, 535–541 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-2873-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-2873-8

Keywords

Navigation