ReviewCureus2022
The Use of Procalcitonin in the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- CT grading combined with inflammatory markers for predicting the efficacy of conservative treatment in acute appendicitis.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Immature granulocyte and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in acute appendicitis: new markers to strengthen diagnosis.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2025Article
- Delta neutrophil index, CRP/albumin ratio, procalcitonin, immature granulocytes, and HALP score in acute appendicitis: Best performing biomarker?Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2025Article
- Predictive efficacy of immature granulocytes in acute complicated appendicitis.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2024Article
- A Bizarre Cause of Acute Appendicitis in a Pediatric Patient: An Ingested Tooth.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common surgical pathologies. Its diagnosis is often carried out based on clinical signs and symptoms, with additional minimally invasive tests (i.e., blood testing) done to support the diagnosis. Procalcitonin (PCT) is a relatively novel biomarker that is starting to be used by clinicians for patients admitted into hospitals with a variety of infections. Its level can be used to identify the presence of infection. The aim of this review is to assess how useful PCT is as a biomarker in supporting clinicians' assessment of patients with suspected appendicitis.
methodsA systematic literature search was carried out, yielding a total of 16 primary research papers deemed appropriate for appraisal.
resultsThe usefulness of PCT in aiding the diagnosis of AA depends on the severity of appendicitis. Patients who experience complicated appendicitis (CAA) such as perforation, gangrene, or necrosis have a significantly raised PCT level (p<0.05) compared to those with uncomplicated appendicitis (UAA) and a variety of other non-appendiceal intra-abdominal pathologies.
conclusionsThe use of PCT in UAA is weak, however, PCT was deemed useful in helping predict CAA, thus helping portray the severity of infection. This, in turn, will help ensure patients are taken to the operating theatre in a timely and safe manner for subsequent appendicectomy.
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.