What is the sensitivity of Murphy's sign (tenderness in the right upper quadrant) in diagnosing acute cholecystitis?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: December 11, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Sensitivity of Murphy's Sign in Acute Cholecystitis

Murphy's sign has a sensitivity of 63-86% for diagnosing acute cholecystitis, making it a useful but imperfect clinical finding that should never be relied upon in isolation. 1, 2

Diagnostic Performance Characteristics

Murphy's sign demonstrates moderate sensitivity with the following performance metrics:

  • Sensitivity ranges from 63% to 86% across prospective studies, meaning it misses approximately 14-37% of acute cholecystitis cases 1, 2
  • Specificity is relatively low at 35-94%, with most studies showing specificity around 35-50%, resulting in many false positives 1, 2
  • Positive predictive value is only 43-73%, indicating that a positive Murphy's sign alone is insufficient for diagnosis 1, 2
  • Negative predictive value is stronger at 82-91%, meaning its absence is somewhat more reliable for excluding disease 1, 2

The World Society of Emergency Surgery meta-analysis reported a positive likelihood ratio of only 2.8 (95% CI 0.8-8.6), with confidence intervals that include 1.0, demonstrating limited diagnostic power 3.

Critical Clinical Limitations

Murphy's sign has several important pitfalls that significantly limit its clinical utility:

  • Prior pain medication administration invalidates the reliability of a negative Murphy's sign, making timing of examination crucial 3, 4
  • The sign may be absent in elderly, diabetic, or immunocompromised patients despite severe gallbladder disease 5
  • Low specificity means it cannot reliably differentiate acute from chronic cholecystitis when used alone 2
  • The large number of false positives limits its standalone diagnostic value 2

Optimal Diagnostic Approach

No single clinical sign or laboratory test has sufficient diagnostic power to establish or exclude acute cholecystitis 3, 5. The most accurate diagnostic strategy combines multiple modalities:

Recommended Diagnostic Triad

When Murphy's sign is combined with elevated neutrophil count and ultrasound showing cholelithiasis or cholecystitis, diagnostic accuracy improves substantially:

  • Sensitivity: 74% 6
  • Specificity: 62% 6
  • Positive predictive value: 80% 6
  • Negative predictive value: 53% 6

This combination approach is significantly more accurate than Murphy's sign alone 5, 6.

Clinical Algorithm

  1. Elicit Murphy's sign during physical examination (maximal tenderness over the gallbladder during deep inspiration) 5
  2. Obtain complete blood count focusing on neutrophil elevation 6
  3. Perform ultrasound as first-line imaging (96% accuracy for gallstones, remains initial test of choice) 3, 5
  4. If ultrasound is negative but clinical suspicion remains high, proceed to hepatobiliary scintigraphy (97% sensitivity, 90% specificity) or CT with IV contrast 3, 4

Comparative Diagnostic Performance

The Tokyo Guidelines diagnostic criteria (which incorporate Murphy's sign along with other findings) demonstrate 84.9% sensitivity and 50.0% specificity for definitive acute cholecystitis, significantly outperforming Murphy's sign alone 7. This validates the necessity of using Murphy's sign as part of a comprehensive diagnostic algorithm rather than as an isolated finding 7.

Alternative Physical Examination Technique

Indirect fist percussion of the liver demonstrates 60% sensitivity for hepatobiliary infection, which is comparable to or better than Murphy's sign (30-33% in comparative studies), with 85% specificity 8. This technique may serve as a useful adjunct when Murphy's sign is equivocal 8.

References

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Guideline

Diagnostic Approach to RUQ Pain with Negative Ultrasound

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Guideline

Diagnostic Approach to Gallbladder Disease

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.