ArticleWorld journal of emergency surgery : WJES2014
Acute appendicitis: position paper, WSES, 2013.
Article in World journal of emergency surgery : WJES, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- One-Month Follow-Up of Patients with Unspecified Abdominal Pain Referring to the Emergency Department; a Cohort Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2019Article
- Spinal/epidural block as an alternative to general anesthesia for laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective randomized clinical study.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2018Article
- Morbidity and mortality rates after emergency abdominal surgery: an analysis of 4346 patients scheduled for emergency laparotomy or laparoscopy.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2017Observational
- Epidemiology and outcomes of acute abdominal pain in a large urban Emergency Department: retrospective analysis of 5,340 cases.Annals of translational medicine · 2016Article
- Important CT findings for prediction of severe appendicitis: involvement of retroperitoneal space.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Appendectomy is one of the most frequently performed operative procedures in general surgery departments of every size and category. Laparoscopic Appendectomy - LA - as compared to Open Appendectomy - OA - was very controversial at first but has found increasing acceptance all over the World, although the percentage of its acceptance is different in the various single National setting. Various meta-analyses and Cochrane reviews have compared LA with OA and different technical details. Furthermore, new surgical methods have recently emerged, namely, the single-port/incision laparoscopic appendectomy and NOTES technique. Their distribution among the hospitals, however, is unclear. Using laparoscopic mini-instruments with trocars of 2-3.5 mm diameter is proposed as a reliable alternative due to less postoperative pain and improved aesthetics. How to proceed in case of an inconspicuous appendix during a procedure planned as an appendectomy remains controversial despite existing study results. But the main question still is: operate or not operate an acute appendicitis, in the meaning of an attempt of a conservative antibiotic therapy. Therefore, we have done a literature survey on the performance of appendectomies and their technical details as well as the management of the intraoperative finding of an inconspicuous appendix in order to write down - under the light of the latest evidence - a position paper.
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.