SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2019
The role of non-invasive imaging techniques in detecting intra-abdominal adhesions: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of non-invasive imaging techniques in detecting intra-abdominal adhesions: a systematic review.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Association between abdominal surgical incision type and midline intraperitoneal adhesion occurrence, findings from laparoscopic evaluation in a low-resource setting; a retrospective cohort of laparoscopic evaluations.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Postoperative abdominopelvic adhesion and umbilical wound validation after single-port laparoscopy or two-port laparoscopy for gynecological surgery: a comparison with conventional laparoscopy.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- MR imaging for preoperative characterization of pelvic adhesions: role in diagnosis and surgical planning.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
- Efficacy and Safety of the Lateral Abdominal Approach for Lumboperitoneal Shunts in the Post-surgical Abdomen.Cureus · 2025Article
- Visceral to subcutaneous fat area ratio predicts severe abdominal adhesions in definitive surgery for anastomotic fistula after small intestine resection.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Quantifiable Measures of Abdominal Wall Motion for Quality Assessment of Cine-MRI Slices in Detection of Abdominal Adhesions.Journal of imaging · 2023Article
- Inter- and Intra-Observer Variability and the Effect of Experience in Cine-MRI for Adhesion Detection.Journal of imaging · 2023Article
- The Benign Side of the Abdominal Wall: A Pictorial Review of Non-Neoplastic Diseases.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- The prevention of postoperative port-site adhesion following single-port access (SPA) laparoscopic surgeries.Medicine · 2021Observational
- A Randomized Controlled Trial of Thermo-Sensitive Sol-Gel Anti-Adhesion Agent after Gynecologic Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntra-abdominal adhesions after surgery are highly prevalent. Adhesions implicate complications during subsequent surgery and can cause chronic abdominal pain. The objective of this review was to investigate the usefulness of non-invasive diagnostic methods for detection of adhesions.
methodsWe searched the electronic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies investigating the use of non-invasive diagnostic imaging techniques for detecting adhesions. Main outcome was the sensitivity and specificity of each technique. We used the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy studies tool to assess bias.
resultsIn total, 25 studies were included: 18 using ultrasound (US), 5 using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 1 using computed tomography (CT), and 1 using both US and MRI. A total of 2195 patients were included. Overall accuracy ranged between 76 and 100% for US studies and between 79 and 90% for MRI and was 66% for CT. Sensitivity ranged between 21 and 100% for US and between 22 and 93% for MRI and was 61% for CT. Specificity was 32-100% for US, 25-93% for MRI, and 63% for CT. Bias analysis revealed that in most studies, investigators were blinded to the reference standard but not to the index test and 11 of 25 studies had a high risk of selection bias.
conclusionsCurrently, abdominal US can be used to determine the presence of adhesions between bowel and the abdominal wall. MRI is also an accurate diagnostic modality and can in addition visualize adhesions between viscera, however, with a tendency to over diagnose adhesions. There is insufficient evidence to support CT as a diagnostic modality for adhesions.
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.