ArticlePolish journal of radiology2023
Computed tomography evaluation of variations in positions and measurements of appendix in patients with non-appendicular symptoms: time to revise the diagnostic criteria for appendicitis.
Article in Polish journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anatomical Variations of the Vermiform Appendix.Acta medica academica · 2024Pooled it
- Appendiceal location in Japanese children with acute appendicitis: pelvic predominance and diagnostic and operative implications.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- Article
- Feasibility of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy for retrocecal appendicitis: A propensity score-matched study with multi-port laparoscopic appendectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Gastrointestinal Ultrasound: Measurements and Normal Findings - What Do You Need to Know?Digestive diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To estimate the frequency distribution of different anatomical positions, and to measure the diameter, wall thickness, and length of appendix in patients with non-appendicular symptoms. Material and methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted among 1,575 patients, who had undergone computed tomography (CT) scan of abdomen for various non-appendicular signs and symptoms. Frequency of distribution of different anatomic locations and measurements of various morphologic parameters were recorded. Results: The most common location of appendix was retrocecal, followed by sub-cecal, post-ileal, and pelvic locations. The mean length of appendix was 66.7 mm (range, 6.3-123 mm), and the diameter was 6.3 mm (range, 2.8-11.3 mm). Diameter of > 6 mm was noted in 48.12% patients. The mean wall thickness was 2.37 mm, ranging 1.2-4.2 mm. The most common intra-luminal content was air-mixed with hypodense or hyperdense material observed in 70.5% of cases. Conclusions: Although an appendix with diameter less than 6 mm may be considered normal, a diameter above 6 mm has an overlap between a normal and inflamed appendix. Therefore, it should be considered in association with clinical and secondary findings to avoid overdiagnosis and unnecessary appendicectomies. We strongly recommend that diameter-based CT criteria to diagnose appendicitis should be revised and standardized.
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.