ArticleScientific reports2025
Utilizing non-invasive biomarkers for early and accurate differentiation of uncomplicated and complicated acute appendicitis: a retrospective cohort analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Low-keV virtual monoenergetic images with rapid kilovoltage-switching DECT for differentiating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis in adults.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Mean platelet volume is a predictor for abscess formation in patients with epididymitis.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- Article
- Delta neutrophil index, CRP/albumin ratio, procalcitonin, immature granulocytes, and HALP score in acute appendicitis: Best performing biomarker?Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute appendicitis is a common condition requiring surgical intervention, with a lifetime risk of 7-8%. Differentiating between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis is essential for appropriate treatment and improved patient outcomes. This study aimed to utilize minimal, non-invasive data to distinguish between these forms of appendicitis, using advanced analytical methods for faster and more precise diagnosis. This retrospective study analyzed acute appendicitis cases from January 2018 to December 2022 at a tertiary care hospital. Data were gathered from 3,045 patients, including demographic details, clinical features, laboratory tests (Red Cell Distribution Width [RDW] and Mean Platelet Volume [MPV]), and imaging results. Patients were classified as having uncomplicated or complicated appendicitis based on surgical and histopathological findings. Statistical analyses, including multivariate logistic regression and ROC curve analyses, were performed using SPSS. Complicated appendicitis was defined based on surgical findings and histopathological criteria, including perforation, abscess formation, or gangrene. Uncomplicated appendicitis was defined as inflammation confined to the appendix without evidence of perforation or abscess. The study population comprised 1,869 males (61.37%) and 1,176 females (38.62%), with a mean age of 36.4 years. The mean RDW was 27.81%, and the mean MPV was 8.68 fL. Among the appendectomy cases, 50.7% were acute appendicitis, 10.3% were negative appendectomies, and 38.9% had complicated appendicitis. RDW was significantly higher in acute appendicitis than in negative cases (t = 2.45, p = 0.02) and even higher in complicated cases (t = 3.78, p = 0.001). MPV was highest in complicated appendicitis, consistent with increased inflammation severity (t = 2.56, p = 0.01). The sensitivity and specificity of RDW for identifying complicated appendicitis were 0.85 and 0.75, respectively, and for MPV, they were 0.80 and 0.70. Univariate logistic regression identified male sex and appendix diameter as significant predictors of complicated appendicitis. In multivariate analysis, appendix diameter remained significant (p = 0.01), and male sex approached significance (p = 0.06). The optimal cutoff for appendix diameter to differentiate appendicitis types was 10 mm, with an AUC of 0.82. RDW, MPV, and appendix diameter provide a reliable method for distinguishing between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Combining these biomarkers enhances diagnostic accuracy and enables precise risk stratification for better patient management.
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.