对于急性疼痛性非外伤性腹痛,x线平片应该保留还是用其他扫描代替?

M. A. E. Bagi, B. Mutairi, S. Alsolamy, Mohamed Alaizari, Sumaya Alrashid, I. Alrashidi, Naila Shaheen MerciaReutener
{"title":"对于急性疼痛性非外伤性腹痛,x线平片应该保留还是用其他扫描代替?","authors":"M. A. E. Bagi, B. Mutairi, S. Alsolamy, Mohamed Alaizari, Sumaya Alrashid, I. Alrashidi, Naila Shaheen MerciaReutener","doi":"10.14303/IMAGING-MEDICINE.1000082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Acute non-traumatic abdominal pain (ANTAP) is a frequent presentation at the emergency department (ED). Plain abdominal radiographs (PAR's) were historically the principal imaging tool. The objective of this study was to determine whether PAR's are still in use for ANTAP diagnosis. The other objective was to determine whether PAR’s stood-alone or were they a redundant step delaying the definitive imaging test. When CT scans were added to PAR's, the sensitivity and specificity of the two modalities were compared. Methods: A report of a retrospective study conducted at an 800-bed hospital ED between 01.06.2014 and 30.06.2014. All patients aged 15 and above who presented with ANTAP and referred first for PAR’s were included. Traumatic, obstetric, gynaecologic cases were excluded. The discharge diagnosis was considered the gold standard. Main findings: The study included 756 patients. 375 (49.6%) were males, 381 (50.4%) were females. The age range was 15 to 92 yrs. Mean age was 46 yrs. The most common presentation was an unclassified abdominal pain in 516 (68%). PAR's were requested alone for 594 (78.5%) and in combination with Conventional CT in 103 (13.6%). Low dose CT was added for 33 (4.3%). The sensitivity of PAR's and CT for urinary stones was 32.8% and 91.3% respectively. The sensitivity of PAR's and CT for intestinal obstruction was 50% and 83.3% respectively. Conclusion: PAR's are still in use as a one-stop shop for imaging the majority of patients presenting with ANTAP. In patients who had both CT and PAR's, there was a low PAR's sensitivity leading to poor congruence in diagnosing abnormal cases. However, CT delivered a higher radiation dose. There is a need to replace the conventional CT and PAR's for ANTAP imaging.","PeriodicalId":13333,"journal":{"name":"Imaging in Medicine","volume":"26 1","pages":"179-183"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Should plain radiographs persist or be replaced by alternative scans for imaging of acute painful non-traumatic abdominal pain?\",\"authors\":\"M. A. E. Bagi, B. Mutairi, S. Alsolamy, Mohamed Alaizari, Sumaya Alrashid, I. Alrashidi, Naila Shaheen MerciaReutener\",\"doi\":\"10.14303/IMAGING-MEDICINE.1000082\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: Acute non-traumatic abdominal pain (ANTAP) is a frequent presentation at the emergency department (ED). Plain abdominal radiographs (PAR's) were historically the principal imaging tool. The objective of this study was to determine whether PAR's are still in use for ANTAP diagnosis. The other objective was to determine whether PAR’s stood-alone or were they a redundant step delaying the definitive imaging test. When CT scans were added to PAR's, the sensitivity and specificity of the two modalities were compared. Methods: A report of a retrospective study conducted at an 800-bed hospital ED between 01.06.2014 and 30.06.2014. All patients aged 15 and above who presented with ANTAP and referred first for PAR’s were included. Traumatic, obstetric, gynaecologic cases were excluded. The discharge diagnosis was considered the gold standard. Main findings: The study included 756 patients. 375 (49.6%) were males, 381 (50.4%) were females. The age range was 15 to 92 yrs. Mean age was 46 yrs. The most common presentation was an unclassified abdominal pain in 516 (68%). PAR's were requested alone for 594 (78.5%) and in combination with Conventional CT in 103 (13.6%). Low dose CT was added for 33 (4.3%). The sensitivity of PAR's and CT for urinary stones was 32.8% and 91.3% respectively. The sensitivity of PAR's and CT for intestinal obstruction was 50% and 83.3% respectively. Conclusion: PAR's are still in use as a one-stop shop for imaging the majority of patients presenting with ANTAP. In patients who had both CT and PAR's, there was a low PAR's sensitivity leading to poor congruence in diagnosing abnormal cases. However, CT delivered a higher radiation dose. There is a need to replace the conventional CT and PAR's for ANTAP imaging.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Imaging in Medicine\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"179-183\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Imaging in Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14303/IMAGING-MEDICINE.1000082\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Imaging in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14303/IMAGING-MEDICINE.1000082","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:急性非外伤性腹痛(ANTAP)是急诊科(ED)的常见表现。腹部平片(PAR’s)历来是主要的成像工具。本研究的目的是确定PAR是否仍用于ANTAP的诊断。另一个目的是确定PAR是单独的,还是延迟最终成像测试的多余步骤。当CT扫描加入PAR时,比较两种方式的敏感性和特异性。方法:对2014年6月1日至2014年6月30日在某800张床位的医院急诊科进行回顾性研究。所有年龄在15岁及以上的ANTAP患者均被纳入研究。排除了创伤、产科和妇科病例。出院诊断被认为是金标准。主要发现:纳入756例患者。男性375例(49.6%),女性381例(50.4%)。年龄范围从15岁到92岁。平均年龄46岁。最常见的表现是516例(68%)的未分类腹痛。594例(78.5%)单独使用PAR, 103例(13.6%)联合使用常规CT。添加低剂量CT 33例(4.3%)。PAR和CT对尿路结石的敏感性分别为32.8%和91.3%。PAR和CT对肠梗阻的敏感性分别为50%和83.3%。结论:PAR仍然是大多数ANTAP患者的一站式成像工具。在同时进行CT和PAR检查的患者中,PAR的敏感性较低,导致诊断异常病例一致性较差。然而,CT的辐射剂量更高。需要替代传统的CT和PAR进行ANTAP成像。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Should plain radiographs persist or be replaced by alternative scans for imaging of acute painful non-traumatic abdominal pain?
Purpose: Acute non-traumatic abdominal pain (ANTAP) is a frequent presentation at the emergency department (ED). Plain abdominal radiographs (PAR's) were historically the principal imaging tool. The objective of this study was to determine whether PAR's are still in use for ANTAP diagnosis. The other objective was to determine whether PAR’s stood-alone or were they a redundant step delaying the definitive imaging test. When CT scans were added to PAR's, the sensitivity and specificity of the two modalities were compared. Methods: A report of a retrospective study conducted at an 800-bed hospital ED between 01.06.2014 and 30.06.2014. All patients aged 15 and above who presented with ANTAP and referred first for PAR’s were included. Traumatic, obstetric, gynaecologic cases were excluded. The discharge diagnosis was considered the gold standard. Main findings: The study included 756 patients. 375 (49.6%) were males, 381 (50.4%) were females. The age range was 15 to 92 yrs. Mean age was 46 yrs. The most common presentation was an unclassified abdominal pain in 516 (68%). PAR's were requested alone for 594 (78.5%) and in combination with Conventional CT in 103 (13.6%). Low dose CT was added for 33 (4.3%). The sensitivity of PAR's and CT for urinary stones was 32.8% and 91.3% respectively. The sensitivity of PAR's and CT for intestinal obstruction was 50% and 83.3% respectively. Conclusion: PAR's are still in use as a one-stop shop for imaging the majority of patients presenting with ANTAP. In patients who had both CT and PAR's, there was a low PAR's sensitivity leading to poor congruence in diagnosing abnormal cases. However, CT delivered a higher radiation dose. There is a need to replace the conventional CT and PAR's for ANTAP imaging.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信