Single- vs. double-contrast gastrointestinal studies: critical analysis of reported statistics

Gelfand, DW; Dj, Ott

doi:10.2214/ajr.137.3.523

Cited by 51 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, if the diagnoses of mild esophagitis, gastritis, and abnormalities in the postoperative stomach were excluded from these statistics, the sensitivity of the UGI series rose to 82%, a figure approaching that of UGI endoscopy. These figures are consistent with previously published reports of the efficacy of the radiologic UGI examination [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. It was not surprising that the false-negative radiologic examinations in this survey included 7 cases of gastritis, 3 cases of mild esophagitis, and 2 abnormalities of the postoperative stomach, since the UGI series is known to be somewhat insensitive to these diagnoses.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Upper gastrointestinal series: Patient management and a study of 199 cases

Munitz

Gelfand

1985

Gastrointest Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Records of 199 patients were analyzed retrospectively after upper gastrointestinal (UGI) series to assess its impact on patient management. Symptoms most predictive of an abnormal UGI series were dysphagia, UGI hemorrhage, abdominal pain, and chest pain. However, 23% of inpatients with seemingly trivial symptoms had shown abnormal results of the study. Overall sensitivity of the UGI series was 65%, which rose to 82% if esophagitis, gastritis, and abnormalities of the postoperative stomach were excluded. Effects on patient management included: serious pathologic change ruled out (53%), further studies ordered (21%), change of therapy (17%), existing therapy continued (16%), surgery performed (7%), and radiologic abnormality ignored (5%). In no case did the combination of initial screening by UGI series followed by endoscopy as indicated lead to subsequently reported morbidity or mortality due to a failure of diagnosis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Upper gastrointestinal series: Patient management and a study of 199 cases

Munitz

Gelfand

1985

Gastrointest Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, several recent studies have indicated that the single-and double-contrast methods, when properly performed, will yield about equal results in the diagnosis of gastric ulcers [5][6]. Biphasic studies, which combine some features of both the single-and double-contrast examinations, have also been advocated [6,7].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cephalic angled views for detection of occult lesser curvature ulcers

Gardiner

Racker

1985

Gastrointest Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A total of 10 gastric ulcers in the lesser curvature, which would probably have been overlooked, were readily seen by using cephalic tube angulation in upper gastrointestinal (GI) radiography. Routine use of angled radiography in patients with a high transverse stomach is recommended to visualize lesser curvature ulcers which, due to the high position of the stomach, are easily missed at fluoroscopy and are not visible on routine films.

show abstract

“…Other nonspecific findings, such as tertiary contractions or disordered peristalsis, may be identified. Double-contrast techniques are superior to single-contrast studies for the detection of small colorectal polyps, but the role of double-versus single-contrast study is less clear in the upper GI tract (Creteur et al 1983;Dooley et al 1984;Gelfand and Ott 1981). In a study comparing radiology and endoscopy, radiology proved to be reliable , and single-contrast methods readily identified clinically significant esophageal disease detected by endoscopy (Ott et al 1983).…”

Section: Radiologymentioning

confidence: 99%