Department of Emergency Medicine, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
University of Minnesota School of Medicine, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Am J Emerg Med. 2020 Jun;38(6):1092-1096. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2019.158377. Epub 2019 Jul 27.
Abdominal radiographs are often obtained in ED patients with suspected constipation, although their utility in adults is not well understood. We sought to compare ED management when an abdominal radiograph is and is not obtained.
We performed a retrospective chart review study of adult ED patients with a chief complaint of constipation from 2010 through 2016. Trained abstractors recorded radiologic tests ordered, treatments received, and final diagnosis. We determined the physician interpretation of the abdominal radiograph and its use in clinical decision making.
Of 1142 eligible patients, 481 (42%) patients underwent abdominal radiography. Stool burden rated moderate or large was observed in 271 patients (46%). Sixteen patients (3%) were diagnosed with small bowel obstruction; 15/16 of these patients had high risk features such as old age, complex surgical history, history of small bowel obstruction, abdominal malignancy, or presented with vomiting or inability to pass flatus. Of the 197 patients with no or mild stool burden or normal radiograph, 109 (55%) were diagnosed with constipation and 89 (45%) received constipation treatment in the ED. Conversely, of the 271 patients with moderate or greater stool burden, 114 (42%) received no treatment for constipation in the ED and 104 (38%) were prescribed no discharge medications for constipation; 77 of these 271 patients (28%) were diagnosed with something other than constipation.
Plain abdominal radiography did not appear to significantly affect the ED management of patients presenting with constipation; it was common for patients to receive treatment that was in direct opposition to radiographic findings. Though a small number of patients had concerning diagnoses identified on plain radiography, the history and physical examination should have sufficiently excluded simple constipation, prompting an alternate diagnostic approach. Fecal loading on radiography does not preclude a more serious diagnosis. In conclusion, abdominal radiography appears to have low value in patients with constipation.
尽管人们对成人腹部 X 光检查的作用了解甚少,但急诊科(ED)经常对疑似便秘的患者进行腹部 X 光检查。我们旨在比较进行和不进行腹部 X 光检查时 ED 的管理方式。
我们对 2010 年至 2016 年期间因便秘为主诉的成年 ED 患者进行了回顾性图表审查研究。经过培训的摘要记录员记录了所开的影像学检查、所接受的治疗和最终诊断。我们确定了医师对腹部 X 光片的解读及其在临床决策中的应用。
在 1142 名符合条件的患者中,481 名(42%)患者接受了腹部 X 光检查。在 271 名(46%)患者中观察到粪便负荷程度为中度或重度。16 名患者(3%)被诊断为小肠梗阻;其中 15/16 名患者具有高危特征,如高龄、复杂的手术史、小肠梗阻史、腹部恶性肿瘤,或表现为呕吐或无法排气。在粪便负荷无或轻度或 X 光正常的 197 名患者中,109 名(55%)被诊断为便秘,89 名(45%)在 ED 接受了便秘治疗。相反,在 271 名粪便负荷程度为中度或以上的患者中,114 名(42%)在 ED 未接受便秘治疗,104 名(38%)未开具便秘出院药物;这 271 名患者中有 77 名(28%)被诊断为除便秘以外的其他疾病。
腹部平片似乎并未显著影响因便秘就诊的患者的 ED 管理;患者接受与影像学发现直接相悖的治疗是很常见的。尽管少数患者的平片检查发现了令人担忧的诊断,但病史和体格检查应足以排除单纯性便秘,从而采用其他诊断方法。X 光检查发现粪便负荷并不能排除更严重的诊断。总之,腹部 X 光检查在便秘患者中的价值似乎较低。