ArticleJournal of medical case reports2008
A pitfall in the interpretation of plain abdnominal radiographs in neonatal intestinal perforation: a case report.
Article in Journal of medical case reports, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe recognition of neonatal intestinal perforation relies on identification of free gas in the peritoneum on plain abdominal radiographs and the associated clinical signs. The neonatal bowel takes several hours to fill with gas, potentially obscuring one of the radiological signs of bowel perforation in the neonate. CASE PRESENTATION: We describe the case of a male, Caucasian neonate, born prematurely at 35+2 weeks of gestation, who was suspected before birth to be at risk of intestinal perforation, based on antenatal ultrasound signs of bowel obstruction. However, the diagnosis of intestinal perforation after birth was initially delayed because the first abdominal radiograph, requested by the neonatal team, was taken too early in the clinical progression of the neonate's condition. As a consequence, this delayed referral to the paediatric surgical team and definitive management.
conclusionThis case illustrates how consideration of the timing of abdominal radiographs in suspected intestinal perforation in the neonate may avoid misinterpretation of radiographic signs, thereby avoiding delays in referral and treatment in the crucial first few hours of life.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.