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
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 Thoeni, R. F.
Right arrow Articles by Venbrux, A. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Thoeni, R. F.
Right arrow Articles by Venbrux, A. C.

Radiology, Vol 146, 603-607, Copyright © 1983 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

The value of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium-enema examinations in the evaluation of patients with subacute and chronic lower intestinal bleeding

RF Thoeni and AC Venbrux

We examined 136 consecutive patients with histories of guaiac positive stool examinations, bright red blood per rectum, or hematochezia to determine the value of the double-contrast barium-enema (DC-BE) examination and colonoscopy/proctoscopy in establishing bleeding sites. If examination findings were analyzed in conjunction with findings of visual examination of the anal area, the difference in the respective sensitivities of the two examinations was not statistically significant. If findings at the visual inspection were excluded, the DC- BE examination missed 45 of 155 proved bleeding sites (sensitivity, 71%) and 13 of 35 nonbleeding lesions (sensitivity for all lesions 70%), while colonoscopy missed 13 of 155 bleeding sites (sensitivity, 92%) and seven of 35 nonbleeding lesions (sensitivity for all lesions, 90%). The sensitivity of both methods was similar if all rectal and anal lesions were excluded. Only eight additional lesions (all polyps) were found in 78 patients who had bleeding internal and external hemorrhoids, anal fissures, and anal tears, and seven of these were found in patients who were older than 50 years of age. We conclude that colonoscopy is superior to the DC-BE examination in the detection of bleeding sites but similar in results to the DC-BE examination if lesions in the anal canal and rectum are excluded. The routine use of the DC-BE examination in patients with superficial lesions in the anal canal should be discouraged unless the patient has persistent bleeding or is 50 years old or older.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
J. D. Lewis, A. Brown, A. R. Localio, and J. S. Schwartz
Initial Evaluation of Rectal Bleeding in Young Persons: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Ann Intern Med, January 15, 2002; 136(2): 99 - 110.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
W. L. England, J. J. Halls, and V. B. Hunt
Strategies for Screening for Colorectal Carcinoma
Med Decis Making, February 1, 1989; 9(1): 3 - 13.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1983 by the Radiological Society of North America.