Evaluation of Bowel Wall Thickening by Computed Tomography to Differentiate Benign from Malignant Lesions

Tapasvi, Chaitanya; Prajapati, Neeraj; Madhok, Rajneesh; Gupta, Ashish; Taneja, Vichi; Aggarwal, Abhinav

doi:10.7860/jcdr/2014/10601.5149

Cited by 11 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recto-sigmoid (63.6%) Richie et al [9] (2016) Rectum (50%) Present Study (2016) Rectum (38.7%) Results of the present study are in good comparison to others as described above. Table 10:-Author and year of study Colorectal Malignancy Benign/Inflammatory Bhatt et al [10] (2011) 96.4% asymmetrical 89% symmetrical Tapasvi et al [12] (2014) 83% asymmetrical 67% symmetrical Present Study (2016) 100% asymmetrical 88.89% symmetrical Our study is in good comparsion with the studies conducted by Bhatt et al [10] (2011) and Tapasvi et al [12] (2014) . Table 11:-Diagnostic Accuracy Of CT For Malignant Lesions.…”

Section: Anatomical Location and Malignant Bowel Wall Thickening:-supporting

confidence: 72%

Role of Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Colorectal Lesions.

D¹,

Kaur²,

Mohi³

et al. 2016

IJAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computed Tomography (CT) has become the most important imaging technique for evaluation of the abdomen and pelvis. CT is used to examine patients with acute abdominal complaints, intestinal obstruction, inflammatory conditions, known or suspected malignancy, abdominal and pelvic trauma. Recent technological advances and accumulated experience in image interpretation suggest that substantial information regarding colorectal lesions can be obtained by CT. This study aims at evaluating the accuracy of CT in characterizing large bowel lesions as benign/inflammatory or malignant conditions, and in suspected cases of malignancy its accuracy in tumor staging.

show abstract

Section: Anatomical Location and Malignant Bowel Wall Thickening:-supporting

confidence: 72%

Role of Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Colorectal Lesions.

D¹,

Kaur²,

Mohi³

et al. 2016

IJAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tapasvi et al showed that focal wall thickening detected in CT is associated with malignancy. They also reported a malignancy rate of 84% in patients with focal wall thickening versus 54% in those without focal wall thickening [ 14 ]. In our study, malignancy rate was higher in those with focal wall thickening (29.4% vs 12.7%).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of Neoplasia in Colonic Wall Thickening Detected via Computerized Tomography

Karaçin¹,

Türker²,

Eren³

et al. 2020

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Colonic wall thickening (CWT) is frequently observed incidentally via abdominal computerized tomography (aCT). Although the general approach to evaluating incidental CWT is a colonoscopic examination, there is a lack of definitive recommendation guidelines. Thus, we aimed to determine neoplasia rates and identify the factors predictive of neoplasia via colonoscopic examinations of patients with CWT incidentally diagnosed via aCT. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 5,300 colonoscopy reports. A total of 122 patients who had CWT incidentally observed via aCT were included in the study. CWT was graded as mild (3-5 mm), moderate (6-12 mm), or severe (≥12 mm). A logistic regression model was used to determine the predictive factors for neoplasia. Results The mean age of the patients was 60 years, and abnormal findings were noted in 52% of the colonoscopies. Neoplastic lesions were detected in 24 patients (19.6%), while colon adenocarcinoma was detected in 8 patients (6.5%). Multivariate analysis showed that moderate-severe, focal, and asymmetric CWT were independent factors for predicting neoplasia (p=0.049, p=0.033, and p=0.018, respectively). Conclusion Pathological findings can be noted via colonoscopic examination in cases of incidental CWT; therefore, patients with moderate-severe, focal, or asymmetric CWT require colonoscopic examination for the purpose of detecting neoplasia.

show abstract

“…A neoplastic cause is suggested if there is focal bowel wall thickening (less than 5 cm of extension) which is typically asymmetrical and eccentric. These may have homogeneous contrast enhancement due to infiltration of a tumour mass, or a heterogeneous areas of low attenuation from ischaemia and necrosis, findings with a sensitivity of up to 97% [ 4 ]. Malignancy may also have shouldered edges as opposed to tapering transition to normal bowel wall.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Infiltrating caecal carcinoma versus appendicitis with caecal phlegmon—can computer tomography differentiate them?

Stella

Chandra

2017

Journal of Surgical Case Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Right iliac fossa pain is a common acute general surgery presentation, and computer tomography (CT) is often used as an aid in determining the diagnosis. CT can play an important role in differentiating malignant and inflammatory causes of caecal wall thickening if certain key features are identified. Two patients with similar presentations of right iliac fossa pain had pre-operative CT, which showed inflammation and caecal thickening, the first was focal with homogenous enhancement, and the second eccentric with stratification. At operation, these were proven to be malignant and inflammatory caecal thickening. Although the clinical presentation of appendicitis and caecal carcinoma may be similar, and the correct recognition and interpretation of differentiating CT characteristics enables the patient for an appropriately tailored operation.

show abstract

Evaluation of Bowel Wall Thickening by Computed Tomography to Differentiate Benign from Malignant Lesions

Cited by 11 publications

References 9 publications

Role of Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Colorectal Lesions.

Role of Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Colorectal Lesions.

Predictors of Neoplasia in Colonic Wall Thickening Detected via Computerized Tomography

Infiltrating caecal carcinoma versus appendicitis with caecal phlegmon—can computer tomography differentiate them?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About