ArticleCureus2025
Perforated Jejunal Diverticulitis: A Retrospective Observational Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
backgroundJejunal diverticulitis is a rare but clinically significant cause of abdominal pain that often mimics other intra-abdominal conditions and carries a risk of serious complications, including perforation. Management strategies have varied between conservative treatment with antibiotics and surgical resection, but evidence has remained limited, particularly in small case series.
methodsA single-centre, retrospective observational study was conducted at the Royal Stoke University Hospital (UK). Patients diagnosed with jejunal diverticular perforation (JDP) between January 2012 and March 2025 were identified from the electronic patient record system. Data on demographics, presentation, imaging, treatment, complications, and outcomes were collected. Statistical analysis included descriptive summaries and exploratory comparisons between surgical and conservative management groups using Fisher's exact test, Student's
resultsTwelve patients were included (mean age 71.5 ± 14.8 years; 75% male). All had undergone contrast-enhanced CT, which demonstrated jejunal diverticulitis with features of perforation in every case. Seven patients (58.3%) were managed surgically, most commonly with segmental jejunal resection and primary anastomosis, while five patients (41.7%) were treated conservatively with intravenous antibiotics and supportive care. Complications occurred in 42.9% of surgical cases and 40.0% of conservative cases, and no mortality was observed in either group.
conclusionJejunal diverticulitis with perforation was an uncommon but important diagnosis that required early recognition and CT imaging for confirmation. Both conservative and surgical management strategies achieved favourable outcomes, and treatment should be guided by clinical stability, response to antibiotics, and suitability for surgery.
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.