ArticleCJEM2026
Agreement between point-of-care ultrasonography and the Tokyo guidelines 2018 for acute cholecystitis (PACED study).
Article in CJEM, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the agreement and diagnostic accuracy of abdominal point-of-care ultrasonography (PoCUS) performed by emergency physicians for suspected acute cholecystitis, using the Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) as the reference standard.
methodsWe conducted a multicenter, diagnostic accuracy study at two university-affiliated tertiary care hospitals in Thailand from October 2019 to June 2024. We included adult patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected acute cholecystitis who underwent PoCUS by an emergency physician, followed by confirmatory radiological imaging (formal ultrasonography or computed tomography; CT). A positive PoCUS was defined as the presence of gallstones plus a sonographic Murphy's sign, gallbladder wall thickening > 3 mm, or pericholecystic fluid. Blinded reviewers adjudicated the final diagnosis based on the comprehensive TG18 criteria. The primary outcome was the diagnostic agreement between the PoCUS result and the final TG18 diagnosis, measured using Cohen's kappa (κ). Secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios. The study was reported in accordance with the STARD 2015 guidelines.
resultsAccording to TG18 criteria, 537 patients (68.6%) were diagnosed with acute cholecystitis. PoCUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 86.6% (95% CI, 83.4-89.4) and a specificity of 17.1% (95% CI, 12.5-22.5). The positive predictive value (PPV) was 70.0%, the negative predictive value (NPV) was 37.0%, and the overall diagnostic accuracy was 64.9%. Among individual PoCUS signs, only gallstones were significantly associated with TG18-confirmed cholecystitis (p < 0.01).
conclusionIn this large, real-world cohort, PoCUS performed by emergency physicians showed poor agreement with the definitive TG18 diagnosis of acute cholecystitis. Although sensitive, its extremely low specificity resulted in a high number of false positives, limiting its usefulness as a standalone diagnostic tool. These findings highlight the importance of combining PoCUS findings with clinical and laboratory data, as recommended by the TG18, to prevent diagnostic errors and unnecessary further testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41928009What 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.