中文摘要：

目的：研究RIPAS阑尾炎（RIPASA）评分对可疑急性阑尾炎的诊断价值。方法：对2014年1月-2015年1月诊断的可疑急性阑尾炎患者150例分别以Alvarado评分和RIPASA评分进行评估，比较其诊断价值。结果：以7．5分和7分定义为RIPASA和Alvarado评分的最佳界值，RIPASA评分和Alvarado评分诊断急性阑尾炎的敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、准确率、阑尾阴性切除率分别为（97．50％、81．42％、85．71％、96．61％、90．30％、14．29％）和（68．75％、87．14％、85．93％、70．93％、73．80％、14．06％）：使用RIPASA和Alvarado评分对可疑急性阑尾炎患者评估结果与综合临床诊断结果相关联，且RIPASA评分关联程度明显高于Alvarado评分（P〈0．05）。结论：急诊医师使用RIPASA评分对中国大陆地区东方人种可疑急性阑尾炎患者进行辅助诊断优于Alvarado评分。

英文摘要：

Objective： To study the diagnosis value of the Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis （RIPASA） score for patients with suspected acute appendicitis. Methods： 150 patients with suspected acute appendicitis were evaluated with the RIPASA score and Alvarado scores respectively to compare the diagnosis value. erived, but decisions for appendicectomy were based on clinical judgement. Receiver operating curve （ROC）, sensitivity （Se）, specificity （Sp）, positive predictive value （PPV） and negative predictive value （NPV） for both scoring systems were calculated. Results： At the optimal cut-off threshold score of 7.5 derived from the ROC, the RIPASA score showed a diagnostic Se 97.50% ,Sp 81.42% ,PPV 85.71% ,NPV 96.61% and diagnostic accuracy 90.30%,respectively. At the cut-off threshold score of 7.0,the Alvarado score showed a diagnostic Se 68.75%,Sp 87.14%,PPV 85.93%,NPV 70.93% and diagnostic accuracy 73.80%,respectively. Predicted negative appendicectomy rates for RIPASA and Alvarado score were 14.29% and 14.06% , respectively （P 〉 0.05）. Conclusion： The RIPASA score is a better diagnostic scoring system than the Alvarado score for the diagnosis of suspected acute appendicitis in China.