首页> 外文期刊>British Journal of Radiology >Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: Diagnostic performance of 64-section multiphase CT enterography and CT angiography compared with capsule endoscopy
【24h】

Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: Diagnostic performance of 64-section multiphase CT enterography and CT angiography compared with capsule endoscopy

机译:胃肠道隐匿性出血:与胶囊内窥镜检查相比,64层多相CT肠造影和CT血管造影的诊断性能

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: To compare the diagnostic capabilities between capsule endoscopy (CE) and multislice CT (MSCT) enterography in combination with MSCT angiography for assessment of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB).Methods: A total of 127 patients with OGIB were looked at in this study. 82 patients (aged 42.7±19.1 years; 34 males) were assigned to receive MSCT diagnosis and 67 patients to (aged 53.9±16.2 years; 28 males) receive CE diagnosis. Among them, 22 patients (aged 54.1±19.1 years; 12 males) received both examinations. Oral isotonic mannitol and intramuscular injection of anisodamine were performed; non-ionic contrast (iopromide, 370mg Iml-1) was intravenously administered; and then multiphase scanning was conducted at arterial, small intestinal and portal venous phases in MSCT. The results were compared with findings of reference standards including double balloon enteroscopy, digital subtraction angiography, intraoperative pathological examination and/or clinical diagnosis.Results: Administration of anisodamine markedly increased the satisfaction rate of bowel filling (94.67% vs 28.57%; p<0.001) but not the diagnostic yield (p=0.293) of MSCT. Compared with MSCT, CE showed an improved overall diagnostic yield (68.66% vs 47.56%; p=0.010), which was also observed in overt bleeding patients (i.e. patients with continued passage of visible blood) (76.19% vs 51.02%; p=0.013) and in patients aged younger than 40 years of age (85% vs 51.28%; p=0.024). However, CE had similar positive rates to MSCT (p>0.05). Among the 22 cases in whom both examinations were conducted, CE showed no significantly different diagnostic capability compared with MSCT (p=0.4597).Conclusion: Both CE and MSCT are safe and effective diagnostic methods for OGIB.Advances in knowledge: CE is preferred for overt bleeding or patients aged younger than 40 years. The combined use of CE and MSCT is recommended in OGIB diagnosis.
机译:目的:比较胶囊内窥镜(CE)和多层CT(MSCT)肠造影与MSCT血管造影对难治性胃肠道出血(OGIB)的诊断能力。方法:本研究共调查127例OGIB患者。分配82例患者(42.7±19.1岁;男34例)接受MSCT诊断; 67例患者(53.9±16.2岁; 28例男)接受CE诊断。其中22例患者(年龄54.1±19.1岁;男12例)接受了两次检查。口服等渗甘露醇和肌肉注射山iso碱;静脉内给予非离子对比剂(碘普罗胺,370mg Iml-1);然后在MSCT的动脉,小肠和门静脉期进行多相扫描。将结果与参考标准的结果进行比较,包括双气囊肠镜检查,数字减影血管造影,术中病理检查和/或临床诊断结果。山:碱的使用显着提高了肠填充的满意度(94.67%vs 28.57%; p <0.001 ),而不是MSCT的诊断率(p = 0.293)。与MSCT相比,CE显示出更高的总体诊断率(68.66%对47.56%; p = 0.010),在明显出血的患者(即持续可见血液通过的患者)中也观察到(76.19%vs 51.02%; p = 0.013)和40岁以下的患者(85%比51.28%; p = 0.024)。但是,CE的阳性率与MSCT相似(p> 0.05)。在进行了两次检查的22例病例中,CE的诊断能力与MSCT相比无显着差异(p = 0.4597)。结论:CE和MSCT都是OGIB的安全有效的诊断方法。明显的出血或年龄小于40岁的患者。在OGIB诊断中建议同时使用CE和MSCT。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号