ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Introducing the ratio of cross diameters of the appendix for ultrasound diagnosis of acute appendicitis can significantly increase specificity.
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 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo validate whether the introduction of the ratio of the cross diameters on the transverse section of the appendix (RATIO) ≤ 1.18 is useful for improving the ultrasound diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA).
methodsData from 220 patients with AA and 110 patients with a normal appendix were retrospectively studied. The RATIO ≤ 1.18, maximal outer diameter (MOD) > 6 mm, and a combination of RATIO ≤ 1.18 and MOD > 6 mm were used for predicting AA. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were calculated.
resultsThe RATIO ≤ 1.18, MOD > 6 mm, and a combination of RATIO ≤ 1.18 and MOD > 6 mm for predicting AA showed a sensitivity of 90, 100, and 90%; specificity of 79.1, 27.3, and 88.2%; and AUC of 0.845, 0.636, and 0.891, respectively. When comparing the outcomes between MOD > 6 mm and a combination of MOD > 6 mm and RATIO ≤ 1.18, the specificity and PPV increased from 27.3 to 88.2% and 73.3 to 93.8%, respectively (all P < 0.0001). The sensitivity and NPV decreased from 100 to 90% and 100 to 81.5%, respectively (all P < 0.0001). The AUC increased from 0.636 to 0.891 (P < 0.0001). When comparing the AUC of MOD > 6 mm, and a combination of RATIO ≤ 1.18 and MOD > 6 mm for predicting AA with the AUC in a previous study, there were no significant differences between each other (all P > 0.05).
conclusionIntroducing the RATIO ≤ 1.18 for the evaluation of AA can improve the diagnostic performance and significantly increase specificity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38832943What 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.