Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38093143›Full record

ArticleEmergency radiology2024

CT esophagogram in the emergency setting: typical findings and suggested workflow.

Brad A Evans, Wendy Y Craig, Christina M Cinelli, Sharon G Siegel

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Emergency radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Brad A EvansMaine Medical Center, 22 Bramhall Street, Portland, ME, 04102, USA. evans.brad@live.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-5765-8324
Wendy Y CraigMaineHealth Institute for Research, 81 Research Drive, Scarborough, ME, 04074, USA.
Christina M CinelliMaine Medical Center, 22 Bramhall Street, Portland, ME, 04102, USA.
Sharon G SiegelMaine Medical Center, 22 Bramhall Street, Portland, ME, 04102, USA.
Maine Medical Center · USMaineHealth · US

Funding

Northern New England Clinical and Translational Research grant U54GM115516
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEsophageal perforation (EP) can be a diagnostic challenge. Computed tomography (CT) and CT esophagography (CTE) are often used to rule out EP in the emergency setting with promising diagnostic performance, but the standard of care remains fluoroscopic esophagography (FE). We assess the diagnostic performance of CT and CTE when interpreted by expert and generalist radiologists and created an imaging workflow guide.

methodsRetrospective study of patients presenting with suspected EP. Two expert radiologists independently reviewed blinded CT/CTE studies, recorded CT findings, and assigned an esophageal injury grade. We also collected initial (general radiologist) CT findings and interpretation and FE diagnoses. We assessed inter-reader reliability and diagnostic performance.

resultsEP was diagnosed in 46/139 (33%) encounters. The most common CT/CTE findings in EP were esophageal wall thickening (46/46, 100%), pneumomediastinum (42/46, 91%), and mediastinal stranding (39/46, 85%). CT and CTE sensitivity for detecting EP was 89% and 89% for expert radiologists, respectively, and 79% and 82% for general radiologists, compared with 46% for FE. Inter-reader agreement for detecting EP by CT and CTE was kappa 0.35 and 0.42 (both p < .001) between expert and generalist radiologists. We present radiographic images for key CT/CTE findings and a suggested workflow for the evaluation of possible EP.

conclusionCT and CTE are more sensitive than FE for EP in the emergency setting. Due to the rarity of EP and current wide variability in imaging interpretation, an imaging workflow and injury grading system based on esophageal and mediastinal CT findings are offered to help guide management.

Indexed as

Esophageal PerforationTomography, X-Ray ComputedHumansReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityWorkflowCT esophagographyEsophageal perforationEsophageal ruptureFluoroscopic esophagography

Identifiers

PMID38093143
OpenAlexW4389668552

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.