Literature DB >> 615812

A comparison of colonoscopy and roentgenography for detecting polypoid lesions of the colon.

J L Leinicke, W J Dodds, W J Hogan, E T Stewart.   

Abstract

This study compares the effectiveness of the roentgen and colonoscopic examination of the colon for detecting polypoid lesions. We evaluated the findings in 64 patients with suspected or known polypoid lesions who received the same colon cleansing regimen for both examinations, and were studied by examiners of similar expertise. As in other studies, the endoscopist had the advantage of knowing the roentgen findings, and the colonoscopic findings were often taken to indicate whether or not a lesion was present. In about half the patients, however, a second roentgen examination, repeat colonoscopy, or surgical specimen provided additional information for scoring. For example, a filling defect of the same size and location on two roentgen examinations, but not demonstrated at colonoscopy was scored as a false negative colonoscopic finding. The study results indicate that 54% of small polyps less than or equal to 0.9 cm in size were missed on roentgen examination, whereas no proven misses for lesions of this size were shown for colonoscopy. This absence of colonoscopic false-negative findings for small polyps, however, may be partially explained by a relative insensitivity of the roentgen method. For larger lesions greater than or equal to 1.0 cm in size the miss-rate for the two examinations was similar: 15% for roentgen examination and 12% for colonoscopy. We conclude: (1) Colonoscopy is a more sensitive method than roentgen examination for detecting small polyps of the colon, and (2) Performance of the two examinations may be comparable for demonstrating lesions 1.0 cm or larger in size.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1977        PMID: 615812     DOI: 10.1007/bf02256483

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Radiol        ISSN: 0364-2356


  11 in total

1.  The radiological demonstraction of colorectal polyps undetected by endoscopy.

Authors:  I Laufer; N C Smith; J E Mullens
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1976-02       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 2.  Colonoscopy in the management of colon polyps.

Authors:  C B Williams; R H Hunt; H Loose; R H Riddell; Y Sakai; E T Swarbrick
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1974-09       Impact factor: 6.939

3.  Colonoscopy experience in 100 examinations.

Authors:  R G Norfleet
Journal:  Wis Med J       Date:  1974-05

4.  Barium enema versus colonoscopy.

Authors:  H W Loose; C B Williams
Journal:  Proc R Soc Med       Date:  1974-10

5.  Colonoscopy in the management of diseases of the colon and rectum.

Authors:  P H Sugarbaker; G C Vineyard; A M Lewicki; G S Pinkus; M J Warhol; F D Moore
Journal:  Surg Gynecol Obstet       Date:  1974-09

6.  Diagnostic and therapeutic applications of fiberoptic colonoscopy.

Authors:  J A Coller; M L Corman; M C Veidenheimer
Journal:  Geriatrics       Date:  1974-10

7.  Examination of the whole colon with the fibreoptic colonoscope.

Authors:  C Williams; T Muto
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1972-07-29

8.  An evaluation of colon cleansing regimens.

Authors:  W J Dodds; G T Scanlon; D K Shaw; E T Stewart; J E Youker; G E Metter
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1977-01       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Comparison of colonoscopy and the contrast enema in five hundred patients with colorectal disease.

Authors:  W I Wolff; H Shinya; A Geffen; S Ozoktay; R DeBeer
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1975-02       Impact factor: 2.565

10.  Fibreoptic examination of the colon: a review of 255 cases.

Authors:  R H Teague; P R Salmon; A E Read
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1973-02       Impact factor: 23.059

View more
  8 in total

1.  The extent of successful colonscopy: its implication for the radiologist.

Authors:  D W Gelfand; W C Wu; D J Ott
Journal:  Gastrointest Radiol       Date:  1979-01-30

Review 2.  Reliability of routine double-contrast examination (DCE) of the large bowel in polyp detection: a prospective clinical study.

Authors:  F T Fork; C Lindström; G R Ekelund
Journal:  Gastrointest Radiol       Date:  1983

3.  Predictive value of a diagnosis of colonic polyp on the double-contrast barium enema.

Authors:  D J Ott; D S Ablin; D W Gelfand; I Meschan
Journal:  Gastrointest Radiol       Date:  1983

Review 4.  Colorectal carcinomas: diagnostic implications of their changing frequency and anatomic distribution.

Authors:  G G Ghahremani; K Dowlatshahi
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1989 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Prospective comparison of double contrast barium enema plus flexible sigmoidoscopy v colonoscopy in rectal bleeding: barium enema v colonoscopy in rectal bleeding.

Authors:  E J Irvine; J O'Connor; R A Frost; P Shorvon; S Somers; G W Stevenson; R H Hunt
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 23.059

6.  Benign colorectal neoplasms undetected by colonoscopy.

Authors:  D W Gelfand; M Y Chen; D J Ott
Journal:  Gastrointest Radiol       Date:  1992

7.  Causes of error in gastrointestinal radiology. II. Barium enema examination.

Authors:  D J Ott; D W Gelfand; N A Ramquist
Journal:  Gastrointest Radiol       Date:  1980-04-30

8.  Double contrast enema and colonoscopy in polyp detection.

Authors:  F T Fork
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1981-11       Impact factor: 23.059

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.