Suppr超能文献

双重对比钡灌肠:何必这么麻烦?

The double contrast barium enema: why bother?

作者信息

Young J

出版信息

South Med J. 1982 Jan;75(1):46-55. doi: 10.1097/00007611-198201000-00012.

Abstract

Despite a wealth of publications extolling the virtues of the double contrast barium enema (DCBE), it is clear that change is only gradual and that in many institutions the single contrast, full column barium enema (BE) is still the routine method of colonic investigation. Much of this may be due to a persistent belief, among the unconverted, that what was good enough yesterday is good enough today. There may also be a belief that an old dog cannot learn new tricks. At least, in many cases, he appears unwilling to try. These beliefs are all too often encouraged by a trickle of articles in the world literature that set out to refute the value of DCBE and thereby add fuel to the dying embers of "conservational" radiology. This article is an attempt to explode some of the persistent fantasies regarding DCBE by reviewing the literature, examining misconceptions, and, hopefully, laying them to rest in their graves--the position that overwhelming worldwide evidence as well as our own experience has assigned for them. I believe that there is little evidence to justify continued use of the barium enema as the standard technic for examining the colon.

摘要

尽管有大量出版物赞扬双重对比钡灌肠(DCBE)的优点,但很明显,改变是渐进的,而且在许多机构中,单对比全结肠钡灌肠(BE)仍是结肠检查的常规方法。这很大程度上可能是由于那些未转变观念的人一直认为,昨天足够好的东西今天也足够好。也可能存在一种观念,即老狗学不会新把戏。至少在很多情况下,他们似乎不愿意尝试。世界文献中不时出现的一些文章试图驳斥DCBE的价值,从而给“保守”放射学的余烬添柴加薪,这些观念常常因此得到鼓励。本文试图通过回顾文献、审视误解,并希望将这些误解埋葬在它们的坟墓中——这是全世界压倒性的证据以及我们自己的经验为它们所确定的位置,来打破一些关于DCBE的持续幻想。我认为,几乎没有证据能证明继续将钡灌肠作为检查结肠的标准技术是合理的。

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