1957
DOI: 10.1148/68.4.542
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Roentgen Criteria of Impending Perforation of the Cecum

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0
2

Year Published

1959
1959
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
15
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This finding should nonetheless be considered indicative of a long-standing stenosis, and it is due to excessive bacterial proliferation with progressive distension of the intestinal lumen [27][28][29].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This finding should nonetheless be considered indicative of a long-standing stenosis, and it is due to excessive bacterial proliferation with progressive distension of the intestinal lumen [27][28][29].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Il riscontro di tale alterazione deve, comunque, essere considerato significativo di una stenosi protratta nel tempo ed è riferibile ad una eccessiva proliferazione batterica, responsabile di una progressiva distensione del lume intestinale [27][28][29].…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Surgical intervention is indicated if the diagnosis is in doubt or if spontaneous rupture of the caecum is suspected. This complication has occurred in pseudo-obstruction (Melamed and Kubian, 1963) and should be anticipated when right iliac fossa tenderness appears or abdominal X-ray shows a caecal diameter of more than 9 cm (Lowman and Davis, 1956).…”
Section: Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…A colonic diameter of 9 cm is commonly used as the value associated with high risk of perforation. 15 However, in a review of 400 cases, Vanek and Al-salti 4 did not see colonic perforation when the colonic diameter was less than 12 cm. 4 Some studies have suggested that the duration of colonic dilatation may be a more important risk factor for perforation than the actual colonic diameter.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%