ArticleJournal of surgical case reports2026
Unmasking the false cecal polyp: a case of inverted appendix-a case report and review of the literature.
Article in Journal of surgical case reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An inverted appendix is a rare incidental finding on colonoscopy, often misinterpreted as a neoplastic lesion. A 74-year-old woman underwent routine screening colonoscopy that revealed a cecal polypoid lesion near the appendiceal orifice. Initial biopsies showed nonspecific inflammation, and a subsequent contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan reported only sigmoid diverticulosis. During a repeat in-hospital colonoscopy, the lesion was re-evaluated and identified as an inverted appendix, preventing unnecessary resection. Retrospective review of the CT images confirmed the diagnosis. Appendiceal inversion may result from surgical manipulation, intussusception, or rarely congenital causes, and is characterized endoscopically by origin at the appendiceal orifice, normal mucosa, and distinctive imaging features. Rarely, it may be associated with mucinous, neuroendocrine, or endometriotic lesions. Awareness of this entity is vital, as biopsy or removal of benign-appearing lesions is not indicated and may result in bleeding or perforation. Careful endoscopic assessment and imaging review are essential to avoid unnecessary resection.
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.