ArticleCureus2023
The Effect of Preoperative Imaging on the Negative Appendicectomy Rate.
Article in Cureus, 2023. 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.
- Appendicitis burden, trends, and inequalities in Europe, 1990-2019: a population-based study.Gastroenterology report · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Appendicitis is one of the most common causes of acute abdominal pain and appendicectomy is one of the most frequently performed surgical procedures. The proliferation of radiological imaging has reduced the number of patients who have a normal appendix removed, i.e., a negative appendicectomy. We aimed to assess the effect of preoperative imaging on the negative appendicectomy rate (NAR). Methodology All emergency appendicectomies performed at a district general hospital in the United Kingdom over two separate one-year periods were retrospectively analysed using emergency theatre log books. The timeframes were chosen based on the introduction of a diagnostic pathway to reduce the number of appendicectomies performed on patients later found not to have appendicitis or alternative abnormality, i.e., a negative appendicectomy. This pathway involved a greater emphasis placed on preoperative imaging (CT or ultrasound) for patients with suspected appendicitis. The study excluded any patients who were found to have an alternative pathology during surgery. Information technology databases were used to collect data on patient demographics, date of surgery, histology, and any preoperative imaging that was performed. All histological findings showing acutely inflamed appendices and those positive for malignancy were categorised as positive, whereas all other findings were categorised as negative. Results During our initial data collection period (April 2018 to April 2019), we collected data on 207 patients who underwent an appendicectomy. The NAR was 17%. During our subsequent data collection period (August 2020 to August 2021), we collected data on 184 patients. The NAR was 16%. In our adult population, the NAR decreased from 13% to 9%. Discussion At first glance, the NAR does not seem to have improved. On closer look, all patients over the age of 21 years in our re-audit underwent pr-operative CT, and there was a reduction in the NAR in these patients. The issue arises with younger patients, in whom justifying the radiation associated with a CT scan may be difficult. Although ultrasound does not carry the same radiation risk, previous audits at our trust have that shown its sensitivity and specificity for appendicitis is approximately 60%. We may have to explore alternative imaging modalities such as MRI in the paediatric population or accept the higher NAR.
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.