G Y Berkovich1, M S Levine, W T Miller. 1. Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce St., Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to determine the CT findings in patients with esophagitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of medical and radiology files revealed 29 patients with esophagitis in whom thoracic CT was performed within 1 month of the diagnosis. The CT scans were reviewed retrospectively for esophageal wall thickening, a target sign, or other abnormalities. The thickness of the esophageal wall was also measured on CT in these 29 patients and compared with a control group of 85 patients. RESULTS: We found that 16 patients (55%) with esophagitis had abnormal findings on CT, including a thickened esophageal wall (using 5 mm as the threshold for wall thickening) in all 16 (55%) and a target sign in five (17%). The overall mean esophageal wall thickness was 4.7 mm (standard deviation [SD], 2 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-8.7 mm) in patients with esophagitis versus a mean wall thickness of 2.9 mm (SD, 0.8 mm; 95% CI, 1.3-4.5 mm) in controls (p <.001). Using the same 5-mm threshold for wall thickening, we found that only three (4%) of 85 controls had a thickened esophageal wall on CT. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients with esophagitis had abnormalities on CT, including a thickened esophageal wall (> or =5 mm) in 55% and a target sign in 17%. Although barium studies and endoscopy are more sensitive modalities for detecting this condition, the CT finding of a relatively long segment of circumferential esophageal wall thickening, with or without a target sign, should suggest the diagnosis of esophagitis in the proper clinical setting.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to determine the CT findings in patients with esophagitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of medical and radiology files revealed 29 patients with esophagitis in whom thoracic CT was performed within 1 month of the diagnosis. The CT scans were reviewed retrospectively for esophageal wall thickening, a target sign, or other abnormalities. The thickness of the esophageal wall was also measured on CT in these 29 patients and compared with a control group of 85 patients. RESULTS: We found that 16 patients (55%) with esophagitis had abnormal findings on CT, including a thickened esophageal wall (using 5 mm as the threshold for wall thickening) in all 16 (55%) and a target sign in five (17%). The overall mean esophageal wall thickness was 4.7 mm (standard deviation [SD], 2 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-8.7 mm) in patients with esophagitis versus a mean wall thickness of 2.9 mm (SD, 0.8 mm; 95% CI, 1.3-4.5 mm) in controls (p <.001). Using the same 5-mm threshold for wall thickening, we found that only three (4%) of 85 controls had a thickened esophageal wall on CT. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients with esophagitis had abnormalities on CT, including a thickened esophageal wall (> or =5 mm) in 55% and a target sign in 17%. Although barium studies and endoscopy are more sensitive modalities for detecting this condition, the CT finding of a relatively long segment of circumferential esophageal wall thickening, with or without a target sign, should suggest the diagnosis of esophagitis in the proper clinical setting.
Authors: Grigory G Karmazanovsky; Svetlana A Buryakina; Evgeny V Kondratiev; Qin Yang; Dmitry V Ruchkin; Dmitry V Kalinin Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Joshua S Niedzielski; Jinzhong Yang; Francesco Stingo; Mary K Martel; Radhe Mohan; Daniel R Gomez; Tina M Briere; Zhongxing Liao; Laurence E Court Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-10-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Sadegh R Alam; Pengpeng Zhang; Si-Yuan Zhang; Ishita Chen; Andreas Rimner; Neelam Tyagi; Yu-Chi Hu; Wei Lu; Ellen D Yorke; Joseph O Deasy; Maria Thor Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2021-01-13 Impact factor: 8.013
Authors: Laurence E Court; Susan L Tucker; Daniel Gomez; Zhongxing Liao; Joy Zhang; Stephen Kry; Lei Dong; Mary K Martel Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2013-05-06 Impact factor: 2.102