| Literature DB >> 32351843 |
Anum Sultan1, Maria Hassan1, Muhammad Ali1.
Abstract
Objective To determine the role of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) with multiplanar (MPR) and curved multiplanar reformations (CMPR) in the detection of the cause of intestinal obstruction. Materials and methods A retrospective analysis of 200 patients with a clinical suspicion of intestinal obstruction referred to the department of radiology, Dr. Ziauddin University Hospital, Clifton campus, from September 2016 to October 2019, was done. All patients who underwent an MDCT scan with oral and intravenous (I/V) contrast were included in the study. Patients with deranged serum creatinine and an allergic reaction to contrast were excluded from the study. MPR and CMPR images were acquired in each patient in addition to routine axial images. The causes of intestinal obstruction as determined by a computed tomography (CT) scan were confirmed on surgery and colonoscopy. The CT scans were analyzed by an independent radiologist with five years of experience blinded to the surgical and colonoscopy findings in detecting the cause of bowel obstruction using the axial, MPR, and CMPR images. Data analysis was done on IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 20.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results Out of 200 patients with a clinical suspicion of intestinal obstruction, 120 patients with intestinal obstruction was confirmed on CT scan. Fifty-eight patients were males (48.33%) and 62 patients were females (51.66%) with a male-to-female ratio of 1:1.06. The mean age of the patients was 54.7 years (age range from 06 years to 85 years). Abdominal distension was the most common presentation seen in 37 patients (30.83%) followed by vomiting in 25 patients (20.83%). Small bowel obstruction was seen in 96 patients (80.00%) with the ileum being the most common site of obstruction seen in 76 patients (63.33%). Among the patients with the ileum being the site of obstruction, distal ileal obstruction was seen in the majority of patients (30 patients, with a frequency of 25.00%). Twenty-three patients (19.16%) had a large bowel obstruction, with sigmoid colon involvement seen as the most common site in 10 patients (8.33%). Adhesions were the leading extrinsic cause of bowel obstruction seen in 32 patients (26.6%). Intraluminal causes of obstruction were seen in 36 patients (30.0%) with carcinoma being the commonest cause (12 patients with a frequency of 10.0%). A foreign body is the primary cause of intraluminal obstruction (three patients, with a frequency of 2.5%). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of MDCT were 86.2%, 92.7%, 90.1%, and 96.4%, respectively. Conclusion MDCT has high sensitivity and specificity to diagnose and determine the cause of bowel obstruction. It not only determines the site of obstruction but also the cause of obstruction, including intrinsic, extrinsic, and intraluminal causes.Entities:
Keywords: intestinal obstruction; mdct
Year: 2020 PMID: 32351843 PMCID: PMC7187995 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.7464
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cureus ISSN: 2168-8184
Distribution of the patients according to presenting symptoms
| CLINICAL SYMPTOMS | NUMBER OF PATIENTS | FREQUENCY OF SYMPTOMS (%) |
| Abdominal distension | 37 | 30.83 |
| Vomiting | 25 | 20.83 |
| Abdominal pain | 19 | 15.83 |
| Constipation | 19 | 15.83 |
| Nausea | 05 | 04.16 |
| Others | 15 | 12.50 |
| Total | 120 | 100 |
Distribution of patients according to the site of bowel obstruction
| SITE OF OBSTRUCTION | NUMBER OF PATIENTS | FREQUENCY OF BOWEL INVOLVEMENT (%) |
| Duodenum | 03 | 2.5 |
| Jejunum | 17 | 14.1 |
| Ileum | 76 | 63.3 |
| Ileocecal junction | 01 | 0.8 |
| Cecum | 03 | 2.5 |
| Ascending colon | 04 | 3.3 |
| Transverse colon | 03 | 2.5 |
| Descending colon | 02 | 1.6 |
| Sigmoid colon | 10 | 8.3 |
| Rectum | 01 | 0.8 |
| Total | 120 | 100 |
Distribution of patients according to the causes of bowel obstruction
| CAUSES OF BOWEL OBSTRUCTION | NUMBER OF PATIENTS | FREQUENCY OF CAUSE OF BOWEL OBSTRUCTION (%) | |
| Extrinsic | Adhesions | 32 | 26.6 |
| Mesenteric ischemia | 19 | 15.8 | |
| Hernia | 16 | 13.3 | |
| Volvulus | 06 | 5.0 | |
| Abdominal collection | 03 | 2.5 | |
| Pregnancy | 01 | 0.8 | |
| Diverticulitis | 01 | 0.8 | |
| Appendicitis | 01 | 0.8 | |
| Intrinsic | Carcinoma | 12 | 10.0 |
| Tuberculosis | 09 | 7.5 | |
| Perforation | 06 | 5.0 | |
| Inflammatory | 05 | 4.1 | |
| Intussusception | 03 | 2.5 | |
| Meckel’s diverticulum | 01 | 0.8 | |
| Intraluminal | Foreign body | 03 | 2.5 |
| Polyp | 02 | 1.6 | |
| Total | 120 | 100 | |
Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of MDCT in detecting different causes of bowel obstruction
MDCT: multidetector computed tomography
| CAUSE OF OBSTRUCTION | SENSITIVITY (%) | SPECIFICITY (%) | POSITIVE PREDICTIVE VALUE | NEGATIVE PREDICTIVE VALUE | KAPPA |
| Adhesions | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Mesenteric ischemia | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Hernia | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Volvulus | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Abdominal collection | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Pregnancy | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Diverticulitis | 7.7 | 84.5 | 25.6 | 89.5 | 0.3 |
| Appendicitis | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Carcinoma | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Perforation | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Tuberculosis | 18.8 | 53.8 | 75 | 58.3 | 0.51 |
| Inflammatory | 54.2 | 46.2 | 41.6 | 95.8 | 0.54 |
| Intussusception | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Meckel’s diverticulum | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Foreign body | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
| Polyp | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1 |
Figure 1MDCT axial (A), coronal (B), and sagittal (C) images showing inverted Meckel’s diverticulum (arrow) resulting in small bowel obstruction with small bowel feces sign in the distal ileum
MDCT: multidetector computed tomography
Figure 2MDCT axial (A), coronal (B), and sagittal (C) images showing internal herniation of the small bowel with cocoon formation (arrow)
MDCT: multidetector computed tomography