ArticleHeliyon2024
External validation of the bedside score for the diagnosis of acute cholecystitis.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Acute cholecystitis usually presents with right upper quadrant (RUQ) abdominal pain. However, there are other conditions with similar findings which make the diagnosis difficult. The objective of this study is to prospectively validate the performance of the bedside score for the diagnosis of cholecystitis in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with possible acute cholecystitis. Study design: We performed a prospective observational study of a convenience sample of patients with RUQ pain admitted to the ED of three academic hospitals. Symptoms (post prandial symptoms), physical signs (RUQ tenderness, murphy's sign) and ultrasound findings (Murphy's sign, gallstone, and gallbladder thickening) were scoring system items. The final diagnosis of cholecystitis was confirmed with a surgical pathology and/or discharge diagnosis of the patient in a 30-day follow-up. The treating physicians' clinical gestalt of acute cholecystitis was also assessed by 5-point Likert scale. Results: One hundred thirty patients were followed up and were included in the analysis. 42 patients (32 %) had cholecystitis. The bedside clinical score of less than 4 had a sensitivity of 100 % (CI95 %: 91.60 %-100 %), negative predictive value (NPV) of 100 % (CI 95 %: 41.35 %-63 %), and negative likelihood ratio (-LR) of 0. Score of 6 and above had a specificity of 90.91 % (CI 95 %: 82.87 %-95.99 %), positive predictive value (PPV) of 83.67 % (CI 95 %: 72.55 %-90.86 %), and positive likelihood ratio (+LR) of 10.74 (CI95 %: 5.54-20.83). Physicians' clinical gestalt at the scale of 4 and 5 showed a specificity of 95.45 % (CI 95 %: 88.77 %-98.75 %), PPV of 90.91 % (CI 95 %: 79.29 %-96.31 %), and +LR of 20.95 (CI95 %: 8.02-54.71). At the same time at the scale of 1 and 2, the sensitivity was 95.24 % (CI 95 %: 83.84 %-99.42 %), NPV was 97.22 % (CI 95 %: 90.01 %-99.27 %), and the -LR was 0.06 (CI 95 %: 0.02-0.423). The area under the curve of bedside clinical score was not significantly higher than clinical gestalt (97.58 (CI 95 %: 95.31-99.85) vs. 95.37 (CI 95: 99.24-100))(p-value = 0.35). Conclusion: This study showed while the bedside score would be helpful to rule out and rule in acute cholecystitis, physicians' gestalt had similar diagnostic performance.
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.