Suppr超能文献

经口小肠详细检查与小肠灌肠造影对比。第二部分:放射学准确性。

Detailed per-oral small bowel examination vs. enteroclysis. Part II: Radiographic accuracy.

作者信息

Ott D J, Chen Y M, Gelfand D W, Van Swearingen F, Munitz H A

出版信息

Radiology. 1985 Apr;155(1):31-4. doi: 10.1148/radiology.155.1.3975414.

Abstract

Accuracy of the detailed per-oral small bowel series and enteroclysis was compared in 134 patients known to have (or not have) disease of the small bowel. Overall sensitivity of the per-oral examination was 92% and specificity 94%, compared to 94% and 89%, respectively, for enteroclysis. There was no difference between the two in Crohn disease, adhesions, and metastatic disease; however, enteroclysis was thought to be more effective in delineating peritoneal adhesions in patients with obstruction. The authors conclude that while the per-oral study and enteroclysis are equally valid methods of examining the small bowel, the per-oral study is preferable as a screening examination because it requires less time, has fewer side effects, and involves a lower radiation exposure.

摘要

在134例已知患有(或未患有)小肠疾病的患者中,比较了详细的经口小肠造影和小肠灌肠造影的准确性。经口检查的总体敏感性为92%,特异性为94%,而小肠灌肠造影的敏感性和特异性分别为94%和89%。在克罗恩病、粘连和转移性疾病方面,两者没有差异;然而,对于有肠梗阻的患者,小肠灌肠造影被认为在描绘腹膜粘连方面更有效。作者得出结论,虽然经口检查和小肠灌肠造影都是检查小肠的有效方法,但经口检查作为筛查检查更可取,因为它所需时间更少,副作用更少,且辐射暴露更低。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验