SynthesisAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Diagnosis accuracy of ultrasonography for acute colonic diverticulitis: a diagnostic meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography for acute colonic diverticulitis (ACD) and its ability to differentiate between uncomplicated and complicated diverticulitis.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted from database inception to November 2024. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool was used to appraise study quality. Statistical analyses, including pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratio (using random-effects models), and summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, were performed using Stata 15.0.
resultsSixteen studies involving 5,019 subjects were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography for diagnosing ACD were 0.92 and 0.97, respectively. The area under the ROC curve was 0.93. For distinguishing uncomplicated from complicated diverticulitis, the sensitivity was 0.93, but specificity was lower at 0.60.
conclusionUltrasonography demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy for ACD (AUC = 0.93), with pooled sensitivity of 0.92 and specificity of 0.97. While it was effective for initial diagnosis, its lower specificity (0.60) in distinguishing uncomplicated from complicated cases suggested it should be integrated with complementary diagnostic modalities to optimize accuracy and guide personalized management strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40928538What 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.