Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30367206›Full record

ReviewDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2019

[Antibiotic treatment vs. appendectomy for non-perforated appendicitis in adults].

S Schölch, C Reißfelder

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

S SchölchChirurgische Klinik, Universitätsmedizin & Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Deutschland. sebastian.schoelch@umm.de.
C ReißfelderChirurgische Klinik, Universitätsmedizin & Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Deutschland.
Heidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For decades, the mandatory treatment for acute uncomplicated appendicitis was urgent appendicectomy. This dogma has now been questioned by several randomized controlled trials, which demonstrated the safety of antibiotic treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis without increased morbidity and mortality. The efficacy of this conservative treatment, however, is inferior to surgery: Within the first year after antibiotic treatment of acute appendicitis, approximately 30% of patients require appendicectomy. Within 5 years the rate of appendicectomy increases to 40% and the life-long risk of appendicectomy after conservative treatment can be expected to be even higher. The advantages of conservative treatment of appendicitis are faster recovery and the lack of postoperative wound pain; however, all currently available trials compared conservative treatment almost exclusively with conventional appendicectomy, trials comparing laparoscopic appendicectomy to antibiotics are currently not available. As laparoscopic appendicectomy is a well-established and safe treatment ubiquitously available in Germany, conservative treatment in patients with uncomplicated appendicitis cannot generally be recommended. As antibiotic treatment is a less effective but equally safe procedure, it can be offered to selected patients only.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAppendectomyAppendicitisLaparoscopyAcute DiseaseAdultGermanyHumansLength of StayRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibioticsConservative treatmentEffectivenessLaparoscopyWound pain

Identifiers

PMID30367206
OpenAlexW2898292380

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.