ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2020
Clinicopathological Criteria Defining Mucinous Appendiceal Tumors from 2476 Appendectomies: a Single-Center Retrospective Study.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinicopathologic and Molecular Characteristics of High-Grade Appendiceal Mucinous Neoplasms.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Unusual histopathologic findings of appendectomy specimens: A retrospective study of cases at Jordan University Hospital over the last decade (2015-2024).Saudi medical journal · 2025Article
- Appendiceal neoplasms in Saudi Arabia: prevalence and clinicopathological profile.Annals of Saudi medicineArticle
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesMucinous appendiceal tumors (MATs) constitute 0.2-0.3% of appendectomies. This retrospective chart review study determines the incidence of MATs among appendectomies at King Abdul-Aziz Specialist Hospital, Taif City, Saudi Arabia, from January 2009 to December 2014. The clinicopathological features, histopathological criteria, management, outcomes of patients, and the impact of histopathological classification on the follow-up period and recurrence are evaluated.
methodsDemographic and clinicopathological data were collected from medical records. Microscopic slides from 2476 appendectomies were re-examined to diagnose and classify MATs into low-grade mucinous neoplasms (LAMNs) and mucinous adenocarcinomas (MACAs). CK20, CK7, and cdx2 immunohistochemistry was applied for evaluating pseudomyxoma peritonei. Data were expressed as numbers, percentages, and mean ± standard deviation.
resultsNine MATs were diagnosed with an incidence of 0.36% of appendectomies, a male:female ratio of 1.25:1 and a mean age of 57.2 years. Acute appendicitis was the commonest clinical presentation. About 66.7% were LAMNs and 33.3% MACAs. Beside appendectomy, MACAs were managed with right hemicolectomy and chemotherapy. The median follow-up was 34 months with recurrence and liver metastases in two MACAs. No recurrences for LAMNs.
conclusionsMATs constitute 0.36% of all appendectomies. Classifying MATs into LAMNs and MACAs is more applicable for both clinical and pathology practices as compared to the three- or four-tiered classification schemes.
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.