Acute Appendicitis in Pregnant Women: Our Clinical Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyse 13 patients who were treated in our clinic due to acute appendicitis during pregnancy. METHODS: Records of the patients who received appendectomy with appendicitis diagnosis in our Turgut Özal University Research and Application Hospital between January 2007 and December 2015 have been analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Appendectomies were performed on 13 pregnant patients with an acute appendicitis diagnosis. Average age of the patients was 27.69 years (between 22-37 years). Most frequent complaint of the patients was abdominal pain and most frequent examination finding was tenderness at right lower quadrant. Ultrasonography was used in all cases for diagnosis. Surgery was decided with clinical diagnosis for five cases (38.5%) where appendix had not been identified with ultrasonography. While laparoscopic appendectomy was applied in one case (7.7%) and open appendectomy was applied using a McBurney incision in 12 cases (92.3%). Average hospitalization duration was 1.69 days. All patients were tracked together through the Gynaecology Department for two weeks after they had been discharged from the hospital. Preterm delivery, maternal and fetal loss did not occur. CONCLUSION: It is considered appropriate to apply ultrasonography routinely to all pregnant patients in whom acute appendicitis is suspected. Concern for maternal or fetal complication that may occur in consequence of an unnecessary surgery should not be at a level that will delay surgical treatment needed by the patient.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".