Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41403804›Full record

ReviewMaedica2025

Acute Appendicitis Over the Time. The Impact of Scientific Discoveries and Technological Advances on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Appendicitis.

Stefan Ilie Neagu, Cristian Constantin Popa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Maedica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Stefan Ilie Neagu"Carol Davila" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
Cristian Constantin Popa"Carol Davila" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acute appendicitis is the touchstone of any surgeon. The most common surgical pathology, acute appendicitis, has known over time, depending on the level of scientific knowledge, different therapeutic approaches, from absolute surgical abstinence to absolute surgical indication. No other aspect of surgical pathology has created so many occasions of successes and undeserved failures. Technologization of surgery through the introduction of laparoscopy brought - in addition to indisputable advantages (but whose importance decreases, also indisputably, with patients' age) and additional factors of operative risk - a risk that increases with age and extent of the intervention. At the current time there are clinical studies that optionally support first-line antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis, surgical treatment being reserved for complicated acute appendicitis. This differentiated therapeutic attitude is possible due to the progresses achieved in abdominal imaging exploration used in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, including ultrasound, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which have allowed a correct morphopathological diagnosis of acute appendicitis. The clinical examination and continuous monitoring of the evolution are essential for the diagnosis and assessment of the effectiveness of the indicated treatment. Unfortunately, Dieulafoy's assertion from the Listerian period that "one should no longer die of acute appendicitis" is still relevant today, in the era of antibiotic therapy and technologization of surgery, as well as - especially - the completion made by Lejars, "with exceptions" ("sauf exceptions").

Identifiers

PMID41403804
PMCPMC12631586

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.