Literature DB >> 19843742

Abdominal 64-MDCT for suspected appendicitis: the use of oral and IV contrast material versus IV contrast material only.

Stephan W Anderson1, Jorge A Soto, Brian C Lucey, Al Ozonoff, Jacqueline D Jordan, Jirair Ratevosian, Andrew S Ulrich, Niels K Rathlev, Patricia M Mitchell, Casey Rebholz, James A Feldman, James T Rhea.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of IV contrast-enhanced 64-MDCT with and without the use of oral contrast material in diagnosing appendicitis in patients with abdominal pain.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial of a convenience sample of adult patients presenting to an urban academic emergency department with acute nontraumatic abdominal pain and clinical suspicion of appendicitis, diverticulitis, or small-bowel obstruction. Patients were enrolled between 8 am and 11 pm when research assistants were present. Consenting subjects were randomized into one of two groups: Group 1 subjects underwent 64-MDCT performed with oral and IV contrast media and group 2 subjects underwent 64-MDCT performed solely with IV contrast material. Three expert radiologists independently reviewed the CT examinations, evaluating for the presence of appendicitis. Each radiologist interpreted 202 examinations, ensuring that each examination was interpreted by two radiologists. Individual reader performance and a combined interpretation performance of the two readers assigned to each case were calculated. In cases of disagreement, the third reader was asked to deliver a tiebreaker interpretation to be used to calculate the combined reader performance. Final outcome was based on operative, clinical, and follow-up data. We compared radiologic diagnoses with clinical outcomes to calculate the diagnostic accuracy of CT in both groups.
RESULTS: Of the 303 patients enrolled, 151 patients (50%) were randomized to group 1 and the remaining 152 (50%) were randomized to group 2. The combined reader performance for the diagnosis of appendicitis in group 1 was a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 76.8-100%) and specificity of 97.1% (95% CI, 92.7-99.2%). The performance in group 2 was a sensitivity of 100% (73.5-100%) and specificity of 97.1% (92.9-99.2%).
CONCLUSION: Patients presenting with nontraumatic abdominal pain imaged using 64-MDCT with isotropic reformations had similar characteristics for the diagnosis of appendicitis when IV contrast material alone was used and when oral and IV contrast media were used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19843742     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.2336

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  14 in total

1.  Acute appendicitis in childhood: oral contrast does not improve CT diagnosis.

Authors:  Crystal R Farrell; Adam D Bezinque; Jared M Tucker; Erica A Michiels; Bradford W Betz
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2018-01-06

Review 2.  Oral contrast for CT in patients with acute non-traumatic abdominal and pelvic pain: what should be its current role?

Authors:  Ania Z Kielar; Michael N Patlas; Douglas S Katz
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2016-05-11

3.  Administration of enteric contrast material before abdominal CT in children: current practices and controversies.

Authors:  Mohamed Mahmoud; John McAuliffe; Lane F Donnelly
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2011-01-11

Review 4.  Use of positive oral contrast agents in abdominopelvic computed tomography for blunt abdominal injury: meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Chau Hung Lee; Benjamin Haaland; Arul Earnest; Cher Heng Tan
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-04-27       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  An evaluation of the use of oral contrast media in abdominopelvic CT.

Authors:  Erica Lauren Buttigieg; Karen Borg Grima; Kelvin Cortis; Sandro Galea Soler; Francis Zarb
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Eliminating routine oral contrast use for CT in the emergency department: impact on patient throughput and diagnosis.

Authors:  Robin B Levenson; Marc A Camacho; Erin Horn; Amina Saghir; Daniel McGillicuddy; Leon D Sanchez
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2012-06-29

7.  The impact of introducing a no oral contrast abdominopelvic CT examination (NOCAPE) pathway on radiology turn around times, emergency department length of stay, and patient safety.

Authors:  Seyed Amirhossein Razavi; Jamlik-Omari Johnson; Michael T Kassin; Kimberly E Applegate
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2014-06-06

8.  Influence of body habitus and use of oral contrast on reader confidence in patients with suspected acute appendicitis using 64 MDCT.

Authors:  Stephan W Anderson; James T Rhea; Holly N Milch; Al Ozonoff; Brian C Lucey; Jorge A Soto
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2010-05-23

9.  Added value of ultrasound re-evaluation for patients with equivocal CT findings of acute appendicitis: a preliminary study.

Authors:  Ji Ye Sim; Hyuk Jung Kim; Jae Woo Yeon; Byoung Sun Suh; Ki Ho Kim; Young Rock Ha; So Ya Paik
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Enteral contrast in the computed tomography diagnosis of appendicitis: comparative effectiveness in a prospective surgical cohort.

Authors:  Frederick Thurston Drake; Rafael Alfonso; Puneet Bhargava; Carlos Cuevas; Manjiri K Dighe; Michael G Florence; Morris G Johnson; Gregory J Jurkovich; Scott R Steele; Rebecca Gaston Symons; Richard C Thirlby; David R Flum
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 12.969

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.