Cited by 15Abdominal vascular conditions and treatmentsAppendicitis Diagnosis and ManagementOmental and Epiploic Conditions

Influence of clinical suspicion on CT accuracy of acute mesenteric ischemia: Retrospective study of 362 patients

Anglaret, S., Dallongeville, A., Beaussier, H., Touloupas, C., Boulay, I., Tardivel, A.M., Béranger, S., Silvera, S. +3 more·2021·European Journal of Radiology

Abstract

Purpose Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) may be underdiagnosed when not clinically suspected before CT is performed. We assessed the influence of a clinical suspicion of AMI on the CT accuracy.Method This retrospective single-centre study included patients who underwent CT in 2014-2019 and had clinically suspected AMI and/or confirmed AMI. CT protocols were adapted based on each patient's presentation and on findings from unenhanced images. The CT protocol was considered optimal for AMI when it included arterial and portal venous phases. CT protocols, accuracy of reports, and outcomes were compared between the groups with and without suspected AMI before CT.Results Of the 375 events, 337 (90 %) were suspected AMI and 66 (18 %) were AMI, including 28 (42 %) with and 38 without suspected AMI. These two groups did not differ significantly regarding the medical history, clinical presentation, or laboratory tests. The CT protocol was more often optimal for AMI in the group with suspected AMI (26/28 [93 %] vs. 28/38 [74 %], p = 0.046). Diagnostic accuracy was not different between groups with and without suspected AMI (26/28 [93 %] vs. 34/38 [90 %], p = 1.00). However, it was lower in the group without suspicion of AMI when the CT protocol was not optimal for AMI (27/28 [96 %] vs 7/10 [70 %], p = 0.048).Conclusions The negative influence of not clinically suspecting AMI can be mitigated by using a tailored CT protocol.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109652

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anglaret, S., Dallongeville, A., Beaussier, H., Touloupas, C., Boulay, I., Tardivel, A. M., Béranger, S., Silvera, S., Chatellier, G., Ronot, M., & Zins, M.
Affiliations
  • Hôpital Paris Saint-Joseph (FR)
  • Hôpital Beaujon (FR)
Corresponding author
Zins, M.
Venue
European Journal of Radiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-05
Volume
138
Pages
109652
ISSN
0720-048X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3139368596
Cited by
14
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2
FWCI
1.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Abdominal vascular conditions and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Appendicitis Diagnosis and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Omental and Epiploic Conditions
Keywords
acute mesenteric ischemia, clinical suspicion, CT protocol optimization, diagnostic accuracy, underdiagnosis, mesenteric ischemia
MeSH terms
Acute Disease, Arteries, Humans, Ischemia, Portal Vein, Retrospective Studies, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Mesenteric Ischemia

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