A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Computed tomography evaluation of variations in positions and measurements of appendix in patients with non-appendicular symptoms: time to revise the diagnostic criteria for appendicitis. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: To estimate the frequency distribution of different anatomical positions, and to measure the diameter, wall thickness, and length of appendix in patients with non-appendicular symptoms.

Material And Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted among 1,575 patients, who had undergone computed tomography (CT) scan of abdomen for various non-appendicular signs and symptoms. Frequency of distribution of different anatomic locations and measurements of various morphologic parameters were recorded.

Results: The most common location of appendix was retrocecal, followed by sub-cecal, post-ileal, and pelvic locations. The mean length of appendix was 66.7 mm (range, 6.3-123 mm), and the diameter was 6.3 mm (range, 2.8-11.3 mm). Diameter of > 6 mm was noted in 48.12% patients. The mean wall thickness was 2.37 mm, ranging 1.2-4.2 mm. The most common intra-luminal content was air-mixed with hypodense or hyperdense material observed in 70.5% of cases.

Conclusions: Although an appendix with diameter less than 6 mm may be considered normal, a diameter above 6 mm has an overlap between a normal and inflamed appendix. Therefore, it should be considered in association with clinical and secondary findings to avoid overdiagnosis and unnecessary appendicectomies. We strongly recommend that diameter-based CT criteria to diagnose appendicitis should be revised and standardized.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10551737PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/pjr.2023.131074DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

computed tomography
8
appendix patients
8
patients non-appendicular
8
frequency distribution
8
wall thickness
8
length appendix
8
appendix
6
diameter
5
tomography evaluation
4
evaluation variations
4

Similar Publications