Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39139307›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Risk Factors Associated With Negative Appendicectomy Rates: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Neil Donald, Laura Halliday, Gillian Smith, Shwetal Dighe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Neil DonaldGeneral Surgery, Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust, Dartford, GBR.
Laura HallidayGeneral Surgery, Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust, Dartford, GBR.
Gillian SmithGeneral Surgery, Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust, Dartford, GBR.
Shwetal DigheGeneral Surgery, Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust, Dartford, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute appendicitis (AA) is the most common emergency general surgical condition worldwide. Diagnosis is challenging and incorporates clinical, biochemical and radiological investigations. Our aim was to provide data from routine practice investigating widely utilised diagnostic methods from a single centre within the United Kingdom.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of patients who underwent a laparoscopic appendicectomy for AA between April 2022 and March 2023. AA was defined as the presence of transmural polymorphonuclear leukocytes in histology. Subgroup analysis was performed on paediatric patients. Factors associated with AA were investigated, and the diagnostic utility of biochemical and radiological investigations was examined.

resultsA total of 330 appendicectomies were analysed. We found an overall negative appendicectomy rate (NAR) of 38% and 48% in paediatric patients. Independent factors associated with AA on the multivariate analysis included elevated neutrophil counts (>7 × 10

conclusionOur study has highlighted the importance of utilising a combination of factors to improve the diagnostic certainty of AA. However, our routine practice data have shown different sensitivities and specificities of imaging in comparison to existing literature, resulting in a high NAR. Further real-world data are needed to understand whether these differences from the existing data are seen in other clinical settings.

Indexed as

appendicitiscomputed tomography (ct)emergency appendicectomynegative appendicectomynegative appendicectomy rate (nar)preoperative imagingultrasound (us)

Identifiers

PMID39139307
PMCPMC11320375

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.