Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31582969›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2019

Intravenous Contrast Agent in Abdominal CT: Is It Really Needed to Identify the Cause of Bowel Obstruction? Proof of Concept.

Federica Vernuccio, Dario Picone, Gregorio Scerrino, Massimo Midiri, Giuseppe Lo Re, Roberto Lagalla, Giuseppe Salvaggio

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 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
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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, 5 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Federica VernuccioDepartment ProMISE (Department of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties), University Hospital of Palermo, Piazza delle Cliniche, 2, 90127 Palermo, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0350-1794
Dario PiconeDepartment of Biopathology and Medical Biotechnologies, University Hospital of Palermo, Via del Vespro 129, 90127 Palermo, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6719-7969
Gregorio ScerrinoUnit of General and Emergency Surgery, Department of Surgical, Oncological and Oral Sciences, University of Palermo, 90127 Palermo, Italy.
Massimo MidiriDepartment of Biopathology and Medical Biotechnologies, University Hospital of Palermo, Via del Vespro 129, 90127 Palermo, Italy.
Giuseppe Lo ReDepartment of Biopathology and Medical Biotechnologies, University Hospital of Palermo, Via del Vespro 129, 90127 Palermo, Italy.
Roberto LagallaDepartment of Biopathology and Medical Biotechnologies, University Hospital of Palermo, Via del Vespro 129, 90127 Palermo, Italy.
Giuseppe SalvaggioDepartment of Biopathology and Medical Biotechnologies, University Hospital of Palermo, Via del Vespro 129, 90127 Palermo, Italy.
University of Palermo · ITDélégation Paris 7 · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo compare sensitivity of unenhanced computed tomography (CT) and contrast-enhanced CT for the identification of the etiology of bowel obstruction. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe retrospectively evaluated abdominal CT scans of patients operated for bowel obstruction from March 2013 to October 2017. Two radiologists evaluated CT scans before and after contrast agent in two reading sessions. Then, we calculated sensitivity of CT in the diagnosis of bowel obstruction and determined in which cases the etiology of bowel obstruction was detected on both unenhanced and enhanced CT or on enhanced CT only. The reference standard was defined as the final diagnosis obtained after surgery.

resultsEighteen patients (mean age 72 ± 15 years, age range 37-88 years) were included in the study. Sensitivity of unenhanced CT and enhanced CT was not significantly different in either small bowel obstruction (64%, 7/11 patients vs. 73%, 8/11 patients;

conclusionIn the diagnosis of small bowel obstruction due to adhesions with normal bowel wall thickening and when a neoplasm is identified as the etiology of large bowel obstruction on unenhanced CT, an intravenous contrast agent may be avoided for the identification of the etiology. In remaining cases, contrast agent is still recommended.

Identifiers

PMID31582969
PMCPMC6748177
OpenAlexW2972110911

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.