ArticleActa radiologica open2021
Low-dose CT for diagnosing intestinal obstruction and pneumoperitoneum; need for retakes and diagnostic accuracy.
Article in Acta radiologica open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Occult Free Perforation in a Patient with Poorly Controlled Crohn's Disease.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of an artificial intelligence algorithm for detecting pneumoperitoneum on abdominal CT scans.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- A-Lines below the Diaphragm - A Case Report of Occult Pneumoperitoneum.Journal of education & teaching in emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Global burden of paralytic ileus and intestinal obstruction in young and middle-aged adults (15-49 years): a systematic analysis from global burden of disease study 2021.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- PACT-3D, a deep learning algorithm for pneumoperitoneum detection in abdominal CT scans.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Imaging Signs for Determining Surgery Timing of Acute Intestinal Obstruction.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOne of the main concerns using low-dose (LD) CT for evaluation of patients with suspected intestinal obstruction or pneumoperitoneum is the potential need to make an additional standard-dose (SD) CT scan (retake) due to insufficient diagnostic accuracy of the LD CT. PURPOSE: To determine the frequency of retakes and evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of LD CT for the assessment of intestinal obstruction and pneumoperitoneum. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis retrospective study registered all LD CT scans over a one-year period at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark in patients with suspected intestinal obstruction or perforation, comprising a total of 643 LD CT scans. A retake was defined as a SD CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis performed with or without intravenous contrast within 72 h after the initial LD CT due to either continued suspicion of intestinal obstruction or perforation or due to unclarified secondary findings. The sensitivity and specificity of LD CT for diagnosing intestinal obstruction and pneumoperitoneum compared to the discharge diagnoses of the scanned patients were determined.
resultsThe frequency of retakes was 3%. The overall LD CT sensitivity and specificity for assessment of patients with suspected intestinal obstruction and pneumoperitoneum was 83% and 99%, respectively, but higher in certain subgroups.
conclusionsLD CT led to few retakes and had a high diagnostic accuracy for diagnosing intestinal obstruction and pneumoperitoneum. Thus, LD CT can be recommended as the examination of choice in patients with suspected intestinal obstruction or perforation in order to reduce radiation dose.
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.