2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcol.2019.10.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison between conventional and structured magnetic resonance imaging reports in perianal fistula

Abstract: Rationale  Very often magnetic resonance imaging is used in the study of complex anal fistulae, but conventional reports may contribute little to what really matters to the coloproctologist. Objective  To compare the clarity and usefulness of the conventional report compared to structured magnetic resonance imaging in cases of anal fistula. Method  30 magnetic resonance exams already performed with an evaluation of anal fistula were again evaluated without the … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 19 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The inability to locate internal anal openings, secondary tracts, and abscesses, as well as the patient's pain and discomfort during the procedure, are the main drawbacks of a conventional fistulogram [1]. Practically, this method is rarely used today due to its low sensitivity and specificity compared to other modalities [7]. Due to better soft tissue resolution [6,8], MR imaging has essentially replaced the use of traditional fistulogram studies in the assessment of perianal fistulas.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The inability to locate internal anal openings, secondary tracts, and abscesses, as well as the patient's pain and discomfort during the procedure, are the main drawbacks of a conventional fistulogram [1]. Practically, this method is rarely used today due to its low sensitivity and specificity compared to other modalities [7]. Due to better soft tissue resolution [6,8], MR imaging has essentially replaced the use of traditional fistulogram studies in the assessment of perianal fistulas.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%