Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31367227›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of emergency surgery : WJES2019

Pregnancy and appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the clinical use of MRI in diagnosis of appendicitis in pregnant women.

Mania Kave, Fateme Parooie, Morteza Salarzaei

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of emergency surgery : WJES, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosis of acute appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A complex case of acute abdomen.International journal of emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. C-reactive protein and digestive pathologies: A narrative review for daily clinical use.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mania Kave1Gynecology and Obstetrics Institution, Faculty of Medicine, Zabol University of Medical Sciences, Zabol, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Fateme Parooie2Student Research Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Zabol University of Medical Sciences, Zabol, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Morteza Salarzaei2Student Research Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Zabol University of Medical Sciences, Zabol, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Zabol University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical use of MRI for the evaluation of acute appendicitis during pregnancy. Methods: The searches were conducted by two independent researchers (MK, MS) to find the relevant studies published from 1/1/2009 until end of 30/12/2018. We searched for published literature in the English language in MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASETM via Ovid, The Cochrane Library, and Trip database. For literature published in other languages, we searched national databases (Magiran and SID), KoreaMed, and LILACS. The keywords used in the search strategy are Pregnancy [MeSH], Pregnant [MeSH] OR-Magnetic resonance imaging [MeSH] OR-Appendicitis [MeSH] OR-Ultrasound, [MeSH] OR, imaging, MRI [MeSH] OR"،" and Right lower quadrant pain [MeSH]. The risk of bias of every article was evaluated by using QUADAS-2. On the basis of the results from the 2 × 2 tables, pooled measures for sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curves (AUC) along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the DerSimonian Lair methodology. Results: As many as 1164 studies were selected. After analyzing the correspondence of the studies with the required criteria, 19 studies were selected for the final review. For appendicitis in pregnancy, the MRI sensitivity was 91.8% at the 95% confidence interval of (95% CI 87.7-94.9%). At the confidence interval of 95%, the specificity was 97.9% (95% CI 0.97.2-100%). The risk of bias in the studies conducted was measured using the QUADAS-2 tool. Conclusion: MRI has high sensitivity and specificity (91.8%, 97.9% respectively) for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant patients with clinically suspected appendicitis. It is an excellent imaging technique in many instances, which does not expose a fetus, or the mother, to ionizing radiation, making it an excellent option for pregnant patients with suspected acute appendicitis.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAppendicitisFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedPregnancyAcute appendicitisMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI)Pregnancy

Identifiers

PMID31367227
PMCPMC6647167
OpenAlexW2963547778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.