Literature DB >> 18289575

The poppy seed test for colovesical fistula: big bang, little bucks!

Eric O Kwon1, Noel A Armenakas, Stephen C Scharf, Georgia Panagopoulos, John A Fracchia.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Diagnosis of a colovesical fistula is often challenging, and usually involves numerous invasive and expensive tests and procedures. The poppy seed test stands out as an exception to this rule. We evaluated the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of various established diagnostic tests used to evaluate a suspected colovesical fistula.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 20 prospectively entered patients with surgically confirmed colovesical fistulas between 2000 and 2006. Each patient was evaluated preoperatively with a (51)chromium nuclear study, computerized tomography of the abdomen and pelvis with oral and intravenous contrast medium, and the poppy seed test. Costs were calculated using institutional charges, 2006 Medicare limiting approved charges and the market price, respectively. The z test was used to compare the proportion of patients who tested positive for a fistula with each of these modalities.
RESULTS: The chromium study was positive in 16 of 20 patients (80%) at a cost of $490.83 per study. Computerized tomography was positive in 14 of 20 patients (70%) at a cost of $652.92 per study. The poppy seed test was positive in 20 of 20 patients (100%) at a cost of $5.37 per study. The difference in the proportion of patients who tested positive for a fistula on computerized tomography and the poppy seed test was statistically significant (p = 0.03). There was no difference between the chromium group and the computerized tomography or poppy seed group (p = 0.72 and 0.12, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The poppy seed test is an accurate, convenient and inexpensive diagnostic test. It is an ideal initial consideration for evaluating a suspected colovesical fistula.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18289575     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.085

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  10 in total

Review 1.  Enterovesical fistulas: diagnosis and management.

Authors:  G Scozzari; A Arezzo; M Morino
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2010-07-09       Impact factor: 3.781

2.  [Colovesical fistula caused by diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon: diagnosis and treatment].

Authors:  W Leicht; C Thomas; J Thüroff; F Roos
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Urinary tract injures: recognition and management.

Authors:  Scott E Delacroix; J C Winters
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2010-06

4.  Kiwi seed test for detection of enterocutaneous fistula.

Authors:  Michael Knoop; Georg Fritzsch
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 5.  [Diverticular disease - diagnosis and classification].

Authors:  B Lembcke
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  [Intestinal neobladder fistula after radical cystectomy and orthotopic ileal neobladder].

Authors:  R Epplen; D Pfister; A Heidenreich
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 0.639

7.  Imaging features of colovesical fistulae on MRI.

Authors:  Y Z Tang; T C Booth; D Swallow; K Shahabuddin; M Thomas; D Hanbury; S Chang; C King
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  A case of colovesical fistula induced by sigmoid diverticulitis.

Authors:  Hwa-Yeon Yang; Woo-Young Sun; Taek-Gu Lee; Sang-Jeon Lee
Journal:  J Korean Soc Coloproctol       Date:  2011-04-30

Review 9.  When the bowel meets the bladder: Optimal management of colorectal pathology with urological involvement.

Authors:  Conor Keady; Daniel Hechtl; Myles Joyce
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2020-05-27

Review 10.  Enterovesical fistulae: aetiology, imaging, and management.

Authors:  Tomasz Golabek; Anna Szymanska; Tomasz Szopinski; Jakub Bukowczan; Mariusz Furmanek; Jan Powroznik; Piotr Chlosta
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 2.260

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.