Low V H, Levine M S, Rubesin S E, Laufer I, Herlinger H
Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 19104.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994 Feb;162(2):329-34. doi: 10.2214/ajr.162.2.8310920.
This study was undertaken to determine if the double-contrast upper gastrointestinal examination is a sensitive technique for diagnosing gastric carcinoma.
We retrospectively reviewed the radiographs of 80 patients with pathologically proved gastric carcinoma who had double-contrast barium studies of the upper gastrointestinal tract between 1985 and 1992. The original radiologic reports were also reviewed to determine if the lesions had been detected on radiographic studies and if a diagnosis of gastric carcinoma had been made or suspected on the basis of the results. Subsequently, radiologic records were reviewed to identify all patients who had double-contrast studies during a recent 1-year period for whom endoscopy was recommended for evaluation of possibly malignant lesions. Pathologic records were also reviewed to determine the number of true-positive and false-positive cases in this group.
The lesions were detected radiographically in all 80 patients. In one case, however, the lesion had been missed on another barium study 2 years earlier, so that we actually detected 79 (99%) of the 80 gastric carcinomas. Malignant neoplasm was diagnosed or suspected in 77 cases (96%). In two of the three cases in which gastric carcinoma was not mentioned in the radiologic reports, the lesion caused gastric outlet obstruction. A separate 1-year retrospective review revealed that only 54 (3.5%) of 1546 patients who had double-contrast studies during this period were referred for endoscopy because of radiographic findings that were equivocal or suggestive of tumor. The presence of gastric carcinoma was confirmed by endoscopy or surgery in 10 (19%) of those 54 patients.
Our findings indicate that the double-contrast upper gastrointestinal examination is a sensitive technique for the diagnosis of gastric carcinoma. Furthermore, a high sensitivity can be achieved without having an inordinate number of patients undergo unnecessary endoscopy.
本研究旨在确定双对比上消化道检查是否为诊断胃癌的敏感技术。
我们回顾性分析了1985年至1992年间80例经病理证实为胃癌患者的上消化道双对比钡餐造影X线片。还查阅了原始放射学报告,以确定病变是否在X线检查中被发现,以及是否根据检查结果做出或怀疑为胃癌的诊断。随后,回顾放射学记录,以识别在最近1年期间进行双对比检查且因可能存在恶性病变而被建议进行内镜检查的所有患者。还查阅了病理记录,以确定该组中的真阳性和假阳性病例数。
所有80例患者的病变均在X线检查中被发现。然而,有1例患者的病变在2年前的另一次钡餐检查中被漏诊,因此我们实际上检测到了80例胃癌中的79例(99%)。77例(96%)诊断或怀疑为恶性肿瘤。在放射学报告中未提及胃癌的3例患者中,有2例病变导致胃出口梗阻。另一项为期1年的回顾性研究显示,在此期间进行双对比检查的1546例患者中,只有54例(3.5%)因X线检查结果不明确或提示肿瘤而被转诊进行内镜检查。这54例患者中有10例(19%)经内镜检查或手术证实存在胃癌。
我们的研究结果表明,双对比上消化道检查是诊断胃癌的敏感技术。此外,在无需大量患者接受不必要内镜检查的情况下即可实现高敏感性。