Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27229509›Full record

SynthesisPediatric radiology2016

Magnetic resonance imaging in pediatric appendicitis: a systematic review.

Michael M Moore, Afif N Kulaylat, Christopher S Hollenbeak, Brett W Engbrecht, Jonathan R Dillman, Sosamma T Methratta

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Pediatric radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Rapid MRI Abdomen for Assessment of Clinically Suspected Acute Appendicitis in the General Adult Population: a Systematic Review.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosis of acute appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Review
  15. Acute appendicitis-advances and controversies.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Michael M MooreDepartment of Radiology, Penn State Hershey Children's Hospital, The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, 500 University Drive, H066, P.O. Box 850, Hershey, PA, 17033-0850, USA. mmoore5@hmc.psu.edu.
Afif N KulaylatDepartment of Surgery, The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Christopher S HollenbeakDepartment of Surgery, The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Brett W EngbrechtDepartment of Surgery, The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Jonathan R DillmanDepartment of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Sosamma T MethrattaDepartment of Radiology, Penn State Hershey Children's Hospital, The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, 500 University Drive, H066, P.O. Box 850, Hershey, PA, 17033-0850, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of appendicitis in children has rapidly increased recently. This change has been primarily driven by the desire to avoid CT radiation dose. This meta-analysis reviews the diagnostic performance of MRI for pediatric appendicitis and discusses current knowledge of cost-effectiveness. We used a conservative Haldane correction statistical method and found pooled diagnostic parameters including a sensitivity of 96.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 94.3-97.8%), specificity of 96.1% (95% CI: 93.5-97.7%), positive predictive value of 92.0% (95% CI: 89.3-94.0%) and negative predictive value of 98.3% (95% CI: 97.3-99.0%), based on 11 studies. Assessment of patient outcomes associated with MRI use at two institutions indicates that time to antibiotics was 4.7 h and 8.2 h, time to appendectomy was 9.1 h and 13.9 h, and negative appendectomy rate was 3.1% and 1.4%, respectively. Alternative diagnoses were present in ~20% of cases, most commonly adnexal cysts and enteritis/colitis. Regarding technique, half-acquisition single-shot fast spin-echo (SSFSE) pulse sequences are crucial. While gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted pulse sequences might be helpful, any benefit beyond non-contrast MRI has not been confirmed. Balanced steady-state free precession (SSFP) sequences are generally noncontributory. Protocols do not need to exceed five sequences; four-sequence protocols are commonly utilized. Sedation generally is not indicated; patients younger than 5 years might be attempted based on the child's ability to cooperate. A comprehensive pediatric cost-effectiveness analysis that includes both direct and indirect costs is needed.

Indexed as

AppendicitisAppendixChildHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingAppendicitisAppendixChildrenMagnetic resonance imagingMeta-analysis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.