Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 300

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Computed Tomography and Ultrasonography Do Not Improve and May Delay the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Appendicitis

Lee, Steven L.·2001·Archives of Surgery

Abstract

HYPOTHESIS: Computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) do not improve the overall diagnostic accuracy for acute appendicitis. DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: University tertiary care center. PATIENTS: Seven hundred sixty-six consecutive patients undergoing appendectomy for suspected appendicitis from January 1, 1995, to December 31, 1999. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Epidemiology of acute appendicitis and the roles of clinical assessment, CT, US, and laparoscopy. RESULTS: The negative appendectomy rate was 15.7%, and the incidence of perforated appendicitis was 14.6%. A history of migratory pain had the highest positive predictive value (91%), followed by leukocytosis greater than 12 x 10(9)/L (90.1%), CT (83.8%), and US (81.3%). The false-negative rates were 60% for CT and 76.1% for US. Emergency department evaluation took a mean +/- SD of 5.2 +/- 5.4 hours and was prolonged by US or CT (6.4 +/- 7.4 h and 7.8 +/- 10.8 h, respectively). The duration of emergency department evaluation did not affect the perforation rate, but patients with postoperative complications had longer evaluations (mean +/- SD, 8.0 +/- 12.7 h) than did those without (4.8 +/- 3.3 h) (P =.04). Morbidity was 9.1%, 6.4% for nonperforated cases and 19.8% for perforated cases. Seventy-six patients had laparoscopic appendectomy, with a negative appendectomy rate of 42.1%, compared with 15.4% for open appendectomy (P<.001). Laparoscopy, however, had minimal morbidity (1.3%) and correctly identified the abnormality in 91.6% of patients who had a normal-appearing appendix. CONCLUSIONS: Migratory pain, physical examination, and initial leukocytosis remain reliable and accurate in diagnosing acute appendicitis. Neither CT nor US improves the diagnostic accuracy or the negative appendectomy rate; in fact, they may delay surgical consultation and appendectomy. In atypical cases, one should consider the selective use of diagnostic laparoscopy instead.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archsurg.136.5.556

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 300

Metadata

Authors
Lee, S. L.
Venue
Archives of Surgery
Published
2001-05-01
Volume
136
Issue
5
Pages
556
ISSN
0004-0010 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2167929256
Cited by
300
References
7
FWCI
12.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Computed Tomography and Ultrasonography Do Not Improve and May Delay the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Appendicitis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archsurg.136.5.556
The paper
Lee, S. L. (2001). Computed Tomography and Ultrasonography Do Not Improve and May Delay the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Appendicitis. Archives of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.136.5.556

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.