ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2022
Vesicourachal diverticulum.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidental discovery of an infected urachal diverticulum mistaken for an umbilical hernia: a case report.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We report a rare complication involving a healthy 45-year-old male patient who underwent an emergency laparoscopic appendicectomy for acute perforated gangrenous appendicitis. The patient was catheterised pre- procedure and the ports were inserted under vision. Upon completion of the procedure, a 15 Fr Robinson drain was left in the pelvis and was fed through the suprapubic port hole. Postoperatively the patient developed worsening, generalised abdominal pain and high output from the drain. The patient was re-catheterised but the computed tomography (CT) cystogram did not show any injury to the bladder. The drain fluid creatinine was noted to be raised (>4,000), indicating that urine was leaking into the drain. Conventional cystogram confirmed a contrast leak from the dome around the drain. Flexible cystoscopy confirmed that the drain had transversed the vesicourachal diverticula. The drain was pulled back and converted to a suprapubic catheter with the patient subsequently being discharged. Vesicourachal diverticula is a rare and often asymptomatic anomaly. When undertaking laparoscopic surgery, precautions should be taken to prevent port site injury such as catheterising the patient to ensure the bladder is empty and inserting the ports under direct vision. It is safer to visualise muscle rather than peritoneum during port insertion. In this case, the bladder diverticula was noticed extraperitoneally. Though the indirect CT cystogram reported no injury, this was unreliable as the bladder was not distended which led to the subtle injury being missed. Traditional cystogram should be considered in cases with a negative CT cystogram and a strong suspicion of bladder injury.
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.