Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33993331›Full record

Trial reportEuropean radiology2021

Final diagnosis and patient disposition following equivocal results on 2-mSv CT vs. conventional-dose CT in adolescents and young adults with suspected appendicitis: a post hoc analysis of large pragmatic randomized trial data.

Jungheum Cho, Seungjae Lee, Hooney Daniel Min, Hae Young Kim, Yousun Ko, Ji Hoon Park, Sung Bin Park, Kyoung Ho Lee, LOCAT Group

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jungheum ChoDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Seungjae LeeDepartment of Applied Bioengineering, Graduate School of Convergence Science and Technology, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Hooney Daniel MinDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Hae Young KimDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Yousun KoBiomedical Research Center, Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Ji Hoon ParkDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Sung Bin ParkDepartment of Radiology, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, 102, Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul, 06973, Korea. pksungbin@paran.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4155-9260
Kyoung Ho LeeDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
LOCAT Group
Seoul National University · KRSeoul National University Bundang Hospital · KRAsan Medical Center · KRChung-Ang University Hospital · KR

Funding

National Research Foundation of Korea NRF-2019R1A2C1002118
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare 2-mSv CT and conventional-dose CT (CDCT, typically 7-8 mSv) regarding final diagnosis and patient disposition following equivocal CT results in adolescents and young adults with suspected appendicitis.

methodsIn total, 3074 patients of 15-44 years (28 ± 9 years, 1672 women) from 20 hospitals were randomized to undergo contrast-enhanced 2-mSv CT (n = 1535) or CDCT (n = 1539) from December 2013 through August 2016. One hundred sixty-one radiologists prospectively rated the likelihood of appendicitis in a Likert scale (i.e., grades 1-5). The final diagnosis was based on CT image, surgical, pathologic, and clinical findings. Post hoc analysis was performed for final diagnosis, surgical procedure, and delay in patient management following equivocal results (i.e., grade 3).

resultsThe 2-mSv CT and CDCT groups were comparable for final diagnosis following equivocal results, including confirmed appendicitis (1.2% [18 patients] vs. 1.2% [19], p > 0.99), negative appendectomy (0.1% [2] vs. 0.3% [4], p = 0.53), and perforated appendicitis (0.1% [1] vs. 0.2% [3], p = 0.53). More patients were confirmed as not having appendicitis following equivocal results in the CDCT group than in the 2-mSv CT group (2.2% [34] vs. 1.0% [16], p = 0.016). The two groups were comparable for the need of appendectomy (1.4% [22] vs. 1.5% [23], p > 0.99), need of additional imaging tests (0.7% [11] vs. 1.1% [17], p = 0.35), and delay in patient management following equivocal results.

conclusion2-mSv CT is comparable to CDCT regarding final diagnosis and patient disposition following equivocal CT results. KEY POINTS: • Our results strengthen evidence justifying the use of low-dose CT instead of conventional-dose CT (CDCT) in adolescents and young adults with suspected appendicitis. • The 2-mSv CT and CDCT groups were comparable for final diagnosis following equivocal CT results, including confirmed appendicitis (1.2% vs. 1.2%, p > 0.99), negative appendectomy (0.1% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.53), and perforated appendicitis (0.1% vs. 0.2%, p = 0.53). • The two groups were comparable for the need for appendectomy (1.4% vs. 1.5%, p > 0.99), need for additional imaging tests (0.7% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.35), and delay in patient management, following equivocal CT results.

Indexed as

AppendicitisAdolescentAppendectomyFemaleHumansRadiation DosageRadiologistsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray ComputedYoung AdultAbdomenAppendicitisRadiation dosageTomography, X-ray computed

Identifiers

PMID33993331
OpenAlexW3163650360

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.