ArticleSurgery in practice and science2025
Assessment of negative appendectomy in acute appendicitis diagnoses.
Article in Surgery in practice and science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and independent regional validation of a dynamic ultrasound appendicitis score for suspected acute appendicitis: a prospective multicenter study.Emergency radiology · 2026Article
- Preservation Versus Routine Removal: Morbidity and Long-Term Outcomes Following Diagnostic Laparoscopy Versus Negative Appendectomy-A Regional Multicentre Observational Cohort Study.World journal of surgery · 2026Observational
- Article
- Diagnostic value of CAR, HALP, and SII for predicting complicated appendicitis: a reassessment of inflammatory indices.BMC surgery · 2026Observational
- Predictive value of the HALP score in differentiating complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2025Article
- A sharp plant stem causing terminal ileal perforation with clinical presentation resembling acute appendicitis: a case report.Frontiers in medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A negative appendectomy is a surgery performed due to a clinical suspicion of acute appendicitis, but no evidence of inflammation is identified upon examination. The main reason is the incorrect diagnosis of acute appendicitis, which remains a challenge, especially in developing countries, where the rates are different among populations. This study aims to explore the prevalence of negative appendectomies in a regional hospital and evaluate the diagnostic methods used in clinical practice. Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent emergency appendectomy between 2021 and 2022. Negative appendectomy was defined as the absence of histopathological evidence of acute appendicitis postoperatively. Results: Out of 324 patients, 38 were found to have undergone a negative appendectomy, representing a two-year rate of 11.7%. Imaging was performed in 78% of cases, but no significant difference was observed in its use between patients with positive and negative appendectomies. Differential diagnoses showed pathologies such as cysts and intestinal lesions. The Alvarado score was found to be a useful tool when applied with a threshold score of 7. However, variability in clinical presentations such as nausea/vomiting, anorexia, right iliac fossa tenderness and fever highlighted the limitations of relying solely on this metric. The factors associated with negative appendectomy were previous abdominal surgery, Alvarado score <7, abdominal pain, rebound tenderness, leukocytosis and neutrophilia. Conclusions: The prevalence of negative appendectomies at our institution was 11.7%. Despite the widespread use of diagnostic imaging and clinical scoring systems, improvements in diagnostic accuracy are necessary to reduce the rate of unnecessary surgeries.
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.