MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017264036 · doi:10.1186/s13017-020-00306-3

Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis: 2020 update of the WSES Jerusalem guidelines

2020· review· en· W3017264036 on OpenAlexaff
Salomone Di Saverio, Mauro Podda, Belinda De Simone, Marco Ceresoli, Goran Augustin, Marja A. Boermeester, Massimo Sartelli, Federico Coccolini, Antonio Tarasconi, Nicola De Angelis, Dieter Weber, Matti Tolonen, Arianna Birindelli, Walter Biffl, Ernest E. Moore, Michael E. Kelly, Kjetil Søreide, Jeffry L. Kashuk, Richard P. G. ten Broek, Carlos Augusto Gomes, Michael Sugrue, Richard Justin Davies, Dimitrios Damaskos, Ari Leppäniemi, Andrew W. Kirkpatrick, Andrew B. Peitzman, Gustavo Pereira Fraga, Ronald V. Maier, Raúl Coimbra, Massimo Chiarugi, Gabriele Sganga, Adolfo Pisanu, Gian Luigi De’ Angelis, Edward Tan, Harry van Goor, Francesco Pata, Isidoro Di Carlo, Osvaldo Chiara, Andrey Litvin, Fabio Cesare Campanile, Boris Sakakushev, Gia Tomadze, Zaza Demetrashvili, Rifat Latifi, Fakri Abu-Zidan, Oreste Romeo, Helmut Alfredo Segovia Lohse, Gian Luca Baiocchi, David W. da Costa, Sandro Rizoli, Zsolt J. Balogh, Cino Bendinelli, Thomas M. Scalea, Rao R. Ivatury, George C. Velmahos, Roland E. Andersson, Yoram Kluger, Luca Ansaloni, Fausto Catena

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Emergency Surgery · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAppendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalFoothills Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineMEDLINEEvidence-based medicineDelphi methodExecutive summaryGeneral surgeryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is still challenging and some controversies on its management are still present among different settings and practice patterns worldwide. In July 2015, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) organized in Jerusalem the first consensus conference on the diagnosis and treatment of AA in adult patients with the intention of producing evidence-based guidelines. An updated consensus conference took place in Nijemegen in June 2019 and the guidelines have now been updated in order to provide evidence-based statements and recommendations in keeping with varying clinical practice: use of clinical scores and imaging in diagnosing AA, indications and timing for surgery, use of non-operative management and antibiotics, laparoscopy and surgical techniques, intra-operative scoring, and peri-operative antibiotic therapy. METHODS: This executive manuscript summarizes the WSES guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AA. Literature search has been updated up to 2019 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. The statements were voted, eventually modified, and finally approved by the participants to the consensus conference and by the board of co-authors, using a Delphi methodology for voting whenever there was controversy on a statement or a recommendation. Several tables highlighting the research topics and questions, search syntaxes, and the statements and the WSES evidence-based recommendations are provided. Finally, two different practical clinical algorithms are provided in the form of a flow chart for both adults and pediatric (< 16 years old) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The 2020 WSES guidelines on AA aim to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) non-operative management for uncomplicated AA, (3) timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, (4) surgical treatment, (5) intra-operative grading of AA, (6) ,management of perforated AA with phlegmon or abscess, and (7) peri-operative antibiotic therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0160.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.125
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1,362
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Emergency SurgerySame topicAppendicitis Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207