ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Evaluation of 18 CT signs in diagnosing cecal volvulus: a multi-reader retrospective study.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Embryo Sign on Abdominal CT as the Footprint of Cecal Volvulus: Improved Practice Through Lessons Learned from a Case Report.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the diagnostic performance and reliability of 18 CT signs to diagnose cecal volvulus, a surgical emergency, versus a group of non-volvulus mimickers. MATERIALS AND
methodsFour radiologists retrospectively and independently assessed 18 CT signs in 191 patients with cecal volvulus (n = 63) or a non-volvulus control group ((n = 128), including cecal bascule (n = 19), mobile cecum (n = 95), and colonic pseudo-obstruction (n = 14)) at a single institution from 2013 to 2021. Fleiss' kappa coefficient was used to assess inter-reader agreement. For diagnostic performance metrics, we assessed sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. For predictive performance, all 18 signs were included in bivariate and stepwise lasso multivariate logistic regression models to diagnose cecal volvulus. Performance was assessed by ROC curves.
results191 patients (mean age: 63 years +/- 15.5 [SD]; 135 women) were included in the study. Nine of the 18 CT signs of cecal volvulus demonstrated good or better (> 0.6) inter-reader agreement. Individual CT signs with sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values all above 70% for diagnosing cecal volvulus were transition point, bird beak, and X-marks-the-spot. A lasso regression model determined four CT features: transition point, bird beak, coffee bean, and whirl had excellent prediction (AUC = .979) for cecal volvulus if all present.
conclusionCT signs for cecal volvulus that have high sensitivity and specificity include: transition point, bird beak, and X-marks-the-spot and were reliable in distinguishing non-volvulus mimickers. If the following four features were present: transition point, bird beak, coffee bean, and whirl, there was excellent prediction (AUC = .979) for cecal volvulus.
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.