ReviewAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Assessment of diagnostic value of ultrasound and multi-slice spiral computed tomography in acute appendicitis: a retrospective study.
Review in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2025. 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.
- Article
- Application value of abdominal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of pediatric patients aged 3-12 years with acute appendicitis.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUltrasound and multi-slice spiral computed tomography (CT) are frequently used to assist the diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA), and the examination results may vary among different demographics. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound and CT for AA.
methodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with AA who underwent emergency surgery at our hospital from March 2021 to August 2023, with postoperative pathological results as the gold standard. Differences in the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound and CT for different types of AA, age groups, and body mass index (BMI) values were then analyzed.
resultsThe overall sample comprised 279 confirmed cases of AA, with 64 cases of simple appendicitis, 127 cases of suppurative appendicitis, and 88 cases of gangrenous appendicitis. For these three pathological classifications, the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound was 68.75% (44/64), 73.22% (93/127), and 81.81% (72/88), respectively, while the diagnostic accuracy of CT was 71.87% (46/64), 82.67% (105/127), and 90.90% (80/88), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the overall diagnostic accuracy between the two methods (P > 0.05). Subgroup analysis showed no difference in diagnostic accuracy between the two methods for patients with normal BMI (P > 0.05). However, for overweight, obese, and elderly patients, CT provided significantly better diagnostic accuracy than ultrasound (P < 0.05).
conclusionWhile ultrasound and CT have similar diagnostic accuracy for different pathological types of AA, CT is more accurate for overweight, obese, and elderly patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39294319What 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.