ArticleCureus2024
Anticipating Urgency: Predictive Factors for Early Intervention in Appendicular Perforation.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAppendicular perforation is a severe complication of acute appendicitis, leading to increased morbidity and complex post-surgical outcomes. Early identification of patients at risk of perforation is crucial to improve clinical management and reduce complications. This study aims to review and summarize the predictive value of clinical, biochemical, and radiological factors in determining the likelihood of appendicular perforation.
methodsA comprehensive literature review was conducted to analyze key clinical, biochemical, and radiological markers associated with appendicular perforation. Clinical factors such as symptom duration, fever, and physical signs of peritonitis were examined. Biochemical markers, including white blood cell (WBC) count, hemoglobin, and serum creatinine, were evaluated for their diagnostic accuracy. Radiological imaging techniques, such as ultrasound (US), were assessed for their ability to detect perforation-related complications.
resultsThis study identifies key predictors of appendicular perforation, including age, pulse rate, abdominal rigidity, and peri-appendiceal collection. Peri-appendiceal collection emerged as a strong predictor (OR=7.09). Logistic regression and machine learning models showed moderate predictive power (AUC 0.54-0.58), with demographic trends influencing clinical outcomes.
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.