Literature DB >> 3892916

The predictive value of physical examinations for ascites.

S Cummings, M Papadakis, J Melnick, G A Gooding, L M Tierney.   

Abstract

To determine the predictive value of physical signs for ascites, we compared the results of physical examination with those of abdominal sonography in 90 men in hospital with liver disease. The positive predictive values of shifting dullness and prominent fluid waves were low (51% and 73%). We divided the patients into two groups: those with prolonged prothrombin times (72% prevalence of ascites by sonogram), and those with normal prothrombin times (15% prevalence). In patients with prolonged prothrombin times, a prominent fluid wave had a very high positive predictive value for ascites (96%). Many patients with prolonged prothrombin times had ascites despite negative physical signs. In contrast, in those with normal prothrombin times, both shifting dullness and prominent fluid waves were usually falsely positive. Patients with normal prothrombin times and no shifting dullness rarely (2%) had ascites. The predictive value of physical signs for ascites depends on the prevalence of ascites in groups of patients that are examined. The prothrombin time is a useful index for identifying inpatients with a high or low prevalence of ascites and the predictive value of physical signs is enhanced by interpreting them in combination with a patient's prothrombin time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 3892916      PMCID: PMC1306129     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  West J Med        ISSN: 0093-0415


  5 in total

1.  Bayesian analysis of electrocardiographic exercise stress testing.

Authors:  R D Rifkin; W B Hood
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1977-09-29       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Evaluation of ascites by ultrasound.

Authors:  B B Goldberg; G A Goodman; H R Clearfield
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1970-07       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Continued heavy drinking and survival in alcoholic cirrhotics.

Authors:  S A Borowsky; S Strome; E Lott
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1981-06       Impact factor: 22.682

4.  The accuracy of the physical examination in the diagnosis of suspected ascites.

Authors:  E L Cattau; S B Benjamin; T E Knuff; D O Castell
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1982-02-26       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Clinical assessment of cirrhosis in severe chronic active liver disease: specificity and sensitivity of physical and laboratory findings.

Authors:  A J Czaja; A M Wolf; A H Baggenstoss
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  1980-06       Impact factor: 7.616

  5 in total
  4 in total

Review 1.  Physical diagnosis versus modern technology. A review.

Authors:  F T Fitzgerald
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1990-04

2.  Testing for ascites.

Authors:  H Schneiderman
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1986-01

3.  Quantitating bedside diagnosis: clinical evaluation of ascites.

Authors:  D L Simel; R A Halvorsen; J R Feussner
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1988 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Ultrasound distinguishes ascites from a large ovarian fluid-filled cyst.

Authors:  Marissa Camilon; Mikaela Chilstrom
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2014-10-10
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.