ArticleTherapeutic advances in infectious disease2018
Incidental peritoneal tuberculosis: surgeon's dilemma in endemic regions.
Article in Therapeutic advances in infectious disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnosing adult and pediatric extrapulmonary tuberculosis by MPT64 antigen detection with immunohistochemistry and immunocytochemistry using reproduced polyclonal antibodies.The journal of pathology. Clinical research · 2024Article
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
backgroundPeritoneal tuberculosis has varying clinical manifestations. The study was conducted to highlight the entity of incidental peritoneal tuberculosis. Diagnostic and therapeutic dilemma is likely to occur on detection of unexpected peritoneal nodules. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY: Incidental peritoneal tuberculosis was defined as peritoneal tuberculosis (peritoneal tubercles or ascites) detected intraoperatively in patients undergoing surgical exploration for other indications with no preoperative suspicion of abdominal tuberculosis or active tubercular lesions anywhere in the body. Retrospective analysis of patients operated in our department from June 2016 to November 2017 was performed.
resultsOf the 409 patients operated, 5 patients (1.2%) had incidental peritoneal tuberculosis. The primary indication of surgery was laparoscopic cholecystectomy in three, restoration of bowel continuity in one and laparoscopic appendectomy in one. Two patients had remote history of antitubercular therapy for pulmonary and nodal tuberculosis, respectively. The three patients planned for laparoscopic cholecystectomy had their procedures deferred on suspicion of peritoneal carcinomatosis. Subsequently, all the three underwent cholecystectomy after completion of antitubercular treatment. None of the resected specimen (gallbladder/appendix/colon) had evidence of tuberculosis (acid fast bacilli positive or caseating granuloma). Antitubercular treatment for 6 months was completed in all the patients with active peritoneal disease.
conclusionIncidental peritoneal tuberculosis represents an uncommon form of peritoneal tuberculosis. Absence of prior tuberculosis does not preclude the diagnosis of peritoneal tuberculosis. In an endemic region of tuberculosis, surgeons must be aware of the entity on encountering such finding. Frozen section can help in guiding appropriate management.
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.