Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33856521›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2021

Diagnostic performance and radiation dose of reduced vs. standard scan range abdominopelvic CT for evaluation of appendicitis.

Alexandra Dowhanik, Elena Tonkopi, Candice E Crocker, Andreu F Costa

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2021. 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
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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, 4 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alexandra DowhanikDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Nova Scotia Health and Dalhousie University, 1276 South Park Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 2Y9, Canada.
Elena TonkopiDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Nova Scotia Health and Dalhousie University, 1276 South Park Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 2Y9, Canada.
Candice E CrockerDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Nova Scotia Health and Dalhousie University, 1276 South Park Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 2Y9, Canada.
Andreu F CostaDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Nova Scotia Health and Dalhousie University, 1276 South Park Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 2Y9, Canada. andreufcosta@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1683-8230
Dalhousie University · CA

Funding

David Fraser Radiology Research Foundation "Organ dose measurements and determination of effective dose for clinical CT protocols using an anthropomorphic phantom"
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the diagnostic performance and radiation dose of reduced vs. standard scan range CT in diagnosing appendicitis.

methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 531 consecutive adults who underwent emergency contrast-enhanced CT for abdominal pain or suspected appendicitis between July 2018 and March 2019. One hundred eighty-one young adults (mean age, 26 ± 6 years) were imaged from L2 to the symphysis pubis (reduced protocol). A total of 350 older patients (mean age, 55 ± 17 years) and those with a wider differential diagnosis were imaged from the diaphragm to the ischium (standard protocol). The reference standard was histopathology (surgical cases) or 3 months of medical record follow-up (nonsurgical cases). Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated. Mean dose-length products (DLP) were compared (t-test). Using an anthropomorphic phantom, organ doses were measured on CT scanners with (scanner 1) and without (scanner 2) automatic voltage selection; effective radiation doses were calculated.

resultsThe frequency of appendicitis was 57/181 (31.5%) and 80/350 (22.9%) in the reduced and standard groups, respectively. Results of the reduced and standard protocols respectively were as follows (95% CI in parentheses): sensitivity, 98.2% (90.4-99.9%) and 100.0 (95.3-100.0%); specificity, 99.2% (95.6-100.0%) and 99.6% (97.9-100.0%); accuracy, 97.8% and 97.4%; mean DLPs, 363 ± 191mGy∙cm and 633 ± 591mGy∙cm (p < 0.0001). Phantom-based measurements of effective dose were 47% lower on scanner 1 (4.64 vs. 2.48 mSv) and 26% lower on scanner 2 (4.68 vs. 3.45 mSv) with the reduced protocol.

conclusionFor young adults with clinically suspected appendicitis, a reduced scan range CT protocol is as sensitive, specific, and accurate as a standard scan range CT and imparts significantly less radiation dose. KEY POINTS: • A reduced scan range CT protocol in young adults with high suspicion of appendicitis demonstrates similar diagnostic performance as a full-range abdominopelvic CT in undifferentiated adult patients. • The reduced scan range CT protocol imparts significantly less radiation dose: 57% based on dose-length product data and 26-47% based on anthropomorphic phantom data.

Indexed as

AppendicitisAdultAgedHumansMiddle AgedPhantoms, ImagingRadiation DosageRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedYoung AdultAppendicitisDiagnosisMultidetector computed tomographyRadiation dosageSensitivity and specificity

Identifiers

PMID33856521
OpenAlexW3154549055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.