Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35989392›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2022

Appendiceal Incidentalomas: Prevalence, Radiographic Characteristics, Management, and Outcomes.

Adam Kelly, Stacy O'Connor, Diana Kane, Chiang-Ching Huang, Harveshp Mogal

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Neoplasms of the Appendix.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2023
    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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Adam KellyDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Stacy O'ConnorDepartment of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Diana KaneDepartment of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Chiang-Ching HuangSchool of Public Health, Biostatistics, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Harveshp MogalDepartment of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. hmogal@uw.edu.
Medical College of Wisconsin · USUniversity of Washington · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Milwaukee · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRadiographically detected incidental appendiceal abnormalities, in this report termed "appendiceal incidentalomas" (AIs), are an ill-defined entity with an unknown prevalence of neoplasm. This study aimed to describe the prevalence, radiographic characteristics, and outcomes of patients with a diagnosis of AI.

methodsThe study reviewed the electronic health records for patients at a single institution undergoing abdominopelvic computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) from 2000 to 2020 for non-appendix-related complaints with mention of appendix abnormality in the radiology report. The suggested diagnosis at the index imaging was recorded. Outcomes were compared between the operative and non-operative patients.

resultsOf 5197 records, 484 were identified as reports of AIs (9 % of screened patients). Neoplasms were suggested radiographically in 16 % (n = 79) of the records, 59 % (47/79) of which were resected. Pathologically, 32 of the abnormalities were confirmed as neoplasms, yielding a diagnostic accuracy of 68 %. Compared with the non-operative patients, the operative patients had AIs with a larger mean diameter (22.7 ± 13.0 vs. 17.8 ±7.7 mm; p = 0.04), a higher colonoscopy rate (51 % vs. 22 %; p = 0.01), and diagnosis at a younger age (55.8 ± 15.6 vs. 67.2 ± 16.0 years; p = 0.003). The postoperative complications were minor (Clavien-Dindo grade 1 or 2) in 26 % and major (grades 3-5) in 4 % of the cases. During a median follow-up period of 28.3 months, 94 % of the patients were alive without disease, and 6 % died of other causes. The 32 non-operative suggested neoplastic AIs had a median follow-up period of 20.9 months. At this writing, 59 % of the operative patients are alive with a stable abnormal appendix, 13 % had no appendix abnormality at last follow-up visit, and 28 % have died of other causes.

conclusionNeoplastic AIs are an uncommon finding and radiographically diagnosed with relatively high accuracy. Larger appendiceal diameter and younger age predict operative intervention. Although surgery is associated with favorable outcomes and minimal risk of postoperative complications, observation of suspected neoplastic AIs may be a safe alternative for select patients undergoing follow-up longitudinal imaging.

Indexed as

Appendiceal NeoplasmsAppendixHumansPostoperative ComplicationsPrevalenceTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID35989392
OpenAlexW4292512814

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.