Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Maglinte, D. D.
Right arrow Articles by Miller, R. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Maglinte, D. D.
Right arrow Articles by Miller, R. E.

Radiology, Vol 144, 737-739, Copyright © 1982 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Lesions missed on small-bowel follow-through: analysis and recommendations

DD Maglinte, BT Burney and RE Miller

Forty-two surgically confirmed small-bowel lesions that were not detected by small-bowel follow-through but were demonstrated by enteroclysis were analyzed to determine why small-bowel follow-through had failed to detect them. Thirty lesions (71%) were not seen in retrospect; this was attributed to technical inadequacies. Twelve lesions (29%) were seen in retrospect. Of these, two (17%) of the lesions had been missed originally because of perceptive errors, seven (58%) because of combined perceptive and technical errors, and three (25%) because of interpretive errors. The preponderance of technical errors emphasizes the need for improvements in the small-bowel follow- through technique. More frequent fluoroscopy and more thorough compression of all filled segments, as is performed in enteroclysis, and a decreased reliance on overhead radiographs should decrease the error rate in the routine small-bowel follow-through examination.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 BMJHome page
R. Sinha, C. Nwokolo, and P. D Murphy
Magnetic resonance imaging in Crohn's disease
BMJ, February 2, 2008; 336(7638): 273 - 276.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
D. D. T. Maglinte and J. E. Huprich
Invited Commentary * Author's Response.
RadioGraphics, May 1, 2006; 26(3): 657 - 662.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
D. D. T. Maglinte
Capsule Imaging and the Role of Radiology in the Investigation of Diseases of the Small Bowel
Radiology, September 1, 2005; 236(3): 763 - 767.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
D. D. T. Maglinte
Invited Commentary
RadioGraphics, May 1, 2005; 25(3): 711 - 718.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
A. S. Ha, M. S. Levine, S. E. Rubesin, I. Laufer, and H. Herlinger
Radiographic Examination of the Small Bowel: Survey of Practice Patterns in the United States
Radiology, May 1, 2004; 231(2): 407 - 412.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
A. K. Hara, J. A. Leighton, V. K. Sharma, and D. E. Fleischer
Small Bowel: Preliminary Comparison of Capsule Endoscopy with Barium Study and CT
Radiology, January 1, 2004; 230(1): 260 - 265.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JRSMHome page
D. W. Wheeler, K. M. Bradley, and J. E. Sola
Demonstration of small-bowel fistula by radiography of drain contents
J R Soc Med, January 7, 2001; 94(7): 345 - 346.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1982 by the Radiological Society of North America.