Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29249008›Full record

ArticleEmergency radiology2018

Secondary imaging for suspected appendicitis after equivocal ultrasound: time to disposition of MRI compared to CT.

James F Martin, David J Mathison, Paul C Mullan, Hansel J Otero

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Emergency radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  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. Review
  6. Complicated appendicitis in an adult patient.Ultrasound (Leeds, England) · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Perforation risk in pediatric appendicitis: assessment and management.Pediatric health, medicine and therapeutics · 2018
    Review
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

James F MartinDivision of Emergency Medicine, Children's National Health System, Washington, DC, USA.
David J MathisonDivision of Emergency Medicine, Children's National Health System, Washington, DC, USA.
Paul C MullanDivision of Emergency Medicine, Children's Hospital of the King's Daughters, Norfolk, VA, USA.
Hansel J OteroDepartment of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Boulevard, Philadelphia, PA, 20910, USA. oteroh@email.chop.edu.
Children's National · USChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia · USChildren's Hospital of The King's Daughters · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to compare MRI to CT as a secondary imaging modality for children age 5 years and older with suspected appendicitis after an equivocal abdominal ultrasound in terms of (1) the time to ED disposition decision, (2) surgery consultation rate, and (3) imaging test accuracy.

methodsWe retrospectively studied children with suspected appendicitis and equivocal ultrasound results who underwent MR or CT as secondary imaging in a pediatric emergency department over two-consecutive 9-month periods. No oral or intravenous contrast was utilized for MRI. No sedation was utilized for any modality. Time of disposition is the time to admission or discharge order.

resultsTwenty-five patients underwent CT and 30 underwent MRI, with no significant difference in the median time from ultrasound to disposition between the CT (5.9 h, IQR 4.5, 8.4) and the MRI (5.9 h, IQR 4.6, 6.9) groups (p = 0.65). Fifteen patients had appendicitis. Of the 40 negative or equivocal studies, surgery was consulted for 79% in the CT and 48% in the MRI group (odds ratio 4.12, 95% CI 1.02-16.67). Diagnostic accuracy was as follows: MRI: sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 97.1%, positive predictive value of 90%, and negative predictive value of 97.1%. Abdominal CT: sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 98.6%, positive predictive value of 95.7%, and negative predictive value of 95.8%.

conclusionMRI is a feasible alternative to CT for secondary imaging in acute appendicitis for showing comparable ED throughput metrics and diagnostic accuracy, with added benefits of reduced radiation and avoidance of intravenous contrast.

Indexed as

AdolescentAppendicitisChildChild, PreschoolDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonographyAppendicitisChildrenCTMRIUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID29249008
OpenAlexW2771487289

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.