Radiology, Vol 200, 475-481, Copyright © 1996 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Fistula in ano: endoanal sonography versus endoanal MR imaging in classification

SM Hussain, J Stoker, WR Schouten, WC Hop and JS Lameris
Department of Radiology, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

PURPOSE: To assess agreement between endoanal sonography, endoanal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and surgery in depiction and classification of fistula in ano. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight consecutive patients with nonspecific, cryptoglandular fistula in ano were studied. The fistulas were classified with endoanal sonography, endoanal MR imaging, and surgery. Agreement between the modalities was also evaluated. RESULTS: Classification of fistulas was possible in 17 of 28 patients (61%) with sonography, in 25 of 28 (89%) with MR imaging, and in 26 of 28 (93%) with surgery. Concordance between endoanal sonography and MR imaging occurred in 46% of the cases (kappa = 0.27, poor agreement); between sonography and surgery in 36% (kappa = 0.09, no agreement); and between MR imaging and surgery in 64% (kappa = 0.43, moderate agreement). CONCLUSION: Endoanal MR imaging more accurately allows depiction and classification of fistula in ano than endoanal sonography.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Jhobta, R. Kaur, R. Jhobta, A. Dabra, and S. Kochhar Fistula in Ano: Role of Transperineal and Transvaginal Sonography Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, November 1, 2006; 22(6): 375 - 381. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Halligan and J. Stoker Imaging of fistula in ano. Radiology, April 1, 2006; 239(1): 18 - 33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Engin Endosonographic imaging of anorectal diseases. J. Ultrasound Med., January 1, 2006; 25(1): 57 - 73. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. N. Buchanan, S. Halligan, C. I. Bartram, A. B. Williams, D. Tarroni, and C. R. G. Cohen Clinical Examination, Endosonography, and MR Imaging in Preoperative Assessment of Fistula in Ano: Comparison with Outcome-based Reference Standard Radiology, December 1, 2004; 233(3): 674 - 681. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Dwarkasing, S. M. Hussain, W. C. J. Hop, and G. P. Krestin Anovaginal Fistulas: Evaluation with Endoanal MR Imaging Radiology, April 1, 2004; 231(1): 123 - 128. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. B. Kruskal, R. A. Kane, and M. M. Morrin Peroxide-enhanced Anal Endosonography: Technique, Image Interpretation, and Clinical Applications RadioGraphics, October 1, 2001; 21(90001): S173 - 189. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. G. H. Beets-Tan, G. L. Beets, A. G. van der Hoop, A. G. H. Kessels, R. F. A. Vliegen, C. G. M. I. Baeten, and J. M. A. van Engelshoven Preoperative MR Imaging of Anal Fistulas: Does It Really Help the Surgeon? Radiology, January 1, 2001; 218(1): 75 - 84. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				E. Rociu, J. Stoker, M. J. C. Eijkemans, and J. S. Laméris Normal Anal Sphincter Anatomy and Age- and Sex-related Variations at High-Spatial-Resolution Endoanal MR Imaging Radiology, November 1, 2000; 217(2): 395 - 401. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				J. Morris, J. A. Spencer, and N. S. Ambrose MR Imaging Classification of Perianal Fistulas and Its Implications for Patient Management RadioGraphics, March 1, 2000; 20(3): 623 - 635. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Stoker, E. Rociu, A. W. Zwamborn, W. R. Schouten, and J. S. Lameris Endoluminal MR Imaging of the Rectum and Anus: Technique, Applications, and Pitfalls RadioGraphics, March 1, 1999; 19(2): 383 - 398. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. A. Yassa and K. P. Lee Biplanar Endosonographic Imeaginlg of the Anal Sphincters Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, November 1, 1998; 14(6): 263 - 266. [Abstract] [PDF]