ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2013
Spectrum of perforation peritonitis.
Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Linking clinical presentation and histopathological data in perforation peritonitis.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Prediction of mortality in secondary peritonitis: a prospective study comparing p-POSSUM, Mannheim Peritonitis Index, and Jabalpur Peritonitis Index.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Emerging Spectrum of Perforation Peritonitis in Developing World.Frontiers in surgery · 2020Article
- Bacteriological profile of intra-abdominal infections in a tertiary care hospital.Iranian journal of microbiology · 2018Article
- Which cause of diffuse peritonitis is the deadliest in the tropics? A retrospective analysis of 305 cases from the South-West Region of Cameroon.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2016Article
- Pneumoperitoneum: What to look for in a radiograph?Journal of family medicine and primary careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPerforation peritonitis mostly results from the perforation of a diseased viscus. Other causes of perforation include abdominal trauma, ingestion of sharp foreign body and iatrogenic perforation. The diagnosis is mainly based on clinical grounds. Plain abdominal X-rays (erect) may reveal dilated and oedematous intestines with pneumoperitoneum. Ultrasound and CT scan may diagnose up to 72% and 82% of perforation respectively. The present study was carried out to study various etiological factors, modes of clinical presentation, morbidity and mortality patterns of perforation peritonitis presented in the RIMS hospital, Imphal, India. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe study was conducted from September 2010 to August 2012 on 490 cases of perforation peritonitis admitted and treated in the Department of Surgery. Initial diagnosis was made on the basis of detailed history, clinical examination and presence of pneumoperitoneum on erect abdominal X-ray.
resultsA total of 490 patients of perforation peritonitis were included in the study, with mean age of 48.28 years. 54.29% patients were below 50 years and 45.71% patients were above 50 years. There were 54.29% male patients and 45.71% female patients. Only 30% patients presented within 24 hours of onset of symptoms, 31.43% patients presented between 24 to 72 hours and 38.57% patients presented 72 hours after the onset of symptoms. Mean duration of presentation was 54.7 hours. Overall 469 patients were treated surgically and 21 patients were managed conservatively. Overall morbidity and mortality recorded in this study were 52.24% and 10% respectively.
Indexed as
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.