ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2018
The value of the erect abdominal radiograph for the diagnosis of mechanical bowel obstruction and paralytic ileus in adults presenting with acute abdominal pain.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- The utility of the abdominal series in the emergency setting: a retrospective review.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Supine and erect abdominal radiographs are both feasible in patients with acute abdomen.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2023Article
- Clinical indications for plain abdominal radiographs: A survey study among radiographers.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2023Article
- Diagnostic values of supine and erect abdominal radiographs for patients with acute abdomen: which is better for decision making?Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2022Article
- Underestimating the impact of erect abdominal radiographs?Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2019Article
- Acute abdominal obstruction: Colon stent or emergency surgery? An evidence-based review.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2019Review
- The value of the erect abdominal radiograph for the diagnosis of mechanical bowel obstruction and paralytic ileus in adults presenting with acute abdominal pain.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2018Article
- Abdominal radiographs in the emergency department: current status and controversies.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2018Article
- Horizontal and vertical beam radiographs in vomiting dogs to diagnose mechanical gastrointestinal ileus: A diagnostic imaging comparative study.Open veterinary journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is discord on the value of the erect abdominal radiograph for diagnosing acute abdominal pathologies. The erect radiograph can be uncomfortable for patients in pain and increases patient radiation dose.
aimTo determine if including the erect abdominal radiograph in plain abdominal radiography (PAR) improved diagnostic accuracy for identifying mechanical bowel obstruction and/or paralytic ileus in adults presenting with acute abdominal pain.
methodsPAR of 40 consecutive adults presenting with suspected bowel obstruction or paralytic ileus was retrospectively sampled and independently reviewed by two emergency department (ED) consultants and two radiology consultants for bowel obstruction and paralytic ileus across two sessions. In session 1, the assessors assessed the supine abdominal radiographs (PAR 1) and clinical details in a randomised order, and session 2, at least 6 weeks later, they assessed the supine and erect radiographs (PAR 2) and clinical details of the randomly re-ordered cases. Computed tomography was the reference standard. Pair-wise comparisons of receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated to assess for significant differences in participants' diagnostic accuracy using MedCalc 16.4.3.
resultsAverage sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC) were 69.7%, 61.0% and 0.642 for PAR 1, respectively, and 80.0%, 53.4% and 0.632 for PAR 2 respectively. For AUROC there were no significant differences (P > 0.05) between PAR 1 and PAR 2. Intra-rater and inter-rater agreement improved in PAR 2.
conclusionThere was no statistically significant improvement in diagnostic accuracy when including the erect radiograph in PAR for the acute abdomen.
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.