ArticleBMJ open2022
Optimising diagnostics to discriminate complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis: a prospective cohort study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of predictive factors and development of a nomogram for complicated acute appendicitis in adults.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Appendicolith detection in dual-energy CT of adult acute appendicitis: comparing portovenous phase and virtual noncontrast with true noncontrast images.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Low-keV virtual monoenergetic images with rapid kilovoltage-switching DECT for differentiating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis in adults.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- The Role of Emerging Immune-Inflammatory Indexes in the Preoperative Differentiation of Complicated and Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Clinical significance of appendicoliths in conservative treatment of acute complicated appendicitis patients with peri-appendiceal abscess: a single-center retrospective study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- Clinical significance of peri-appendiceal abscess and phlegmon in acute complicated appendicitis patients undergoing emergency appendectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of doctors at the emergency department and radiologists in differentiating between complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024Article
- Validation of scoring systems for the prediction of complicated appendicitis in adults using clinical and computed tomographic findings.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- IL-5 Serum and Appendicular Lavage Fluid Concentrations Correlate with Eosinophilic Infiltration in the Appendicular Wall Supporting a Role for a Hypersensitivity Type I Reaction in Acute Appendicitis.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGrowing evidence is showing that complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis are two different entities that may be treated differently. A correct diagnosis of the type of appendicitis is therefore essential. The Scoring system of Appendicitis Severity (SAS) combines clinical, laboratory and imaging findings. The SAS rules out complicated appendicitis in 95% (negative predictive value, NPV) and detects 95% (sensitivity) of patients with complicated appendicitis in adults suspected of acute appendicitis. However, this scoring system has not yet been validated externally. In this study, we aim to provide a prospective external validation of the SAS in a new cohort of patients with clinical suspicion of appendicitis. We will optimise the score when necessary. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The SAS will be validated in 795 consecutive adult patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis confirmed by imaging. Data will be collected prospectively in multiple centres. The predicted diagnosis based on the SAS score will be compared with the combined surgical and histological diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracy for ruling out complicated appendicitis will be calculated. If the SAS does not reach a sensitivity and NPV of 95% in its present form, the score will be optimised. After optimisation, a second external validation will be performed in a new group of 328 patients. Furthermore, the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical perspective of the treating physician for differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis and the patient's preferences for different treatment options will be assessed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by the Amsterdam UMC Medical Ethics Committee (reference W19_416 # 19.483). Because of the observational nature of this study, the study does not fall under the scope of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act. Results will be presented in peer-reviewed journals. This protocol is submitted for publication before analysis of the results.
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.