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


     


Published online before print October 21, 2004, 10.1148/radiol.2333031724
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2333031724v1
233/3/674    most recent
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 Buchanan, G. N.
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, C. R. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Buchanan, G. N.
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, C. R. G.
(Radiology 2004;233:674-681.)
© RSNA, 2004


Gastrointestinal Imaging

Clinical Examination, Endosonography, and MR Imaging in Preoperative Assessment of Fistula in Ano: Comparison with Outcome-based Reference Standard1

Gordon N. Buchanan, FRCS, Steve Halligan, MD, FRCP, FRCR, Clive I. Bartram, FRCR, FRCP, FRCS, Andrew B. Williams, MS, FRCS, Danilo Tarroni, MD and C. Richard G. Cohen, MS, FRCS

1 From the Departments of Surgery (G.N.B., A.B.W., D.T., C.R.G.C.) and Intestinal Imaging (S.H., C.I.B.), St. Mark’s Hospital, Level 4V, Watford Road, Northwick Park, Harrow, London HA1 3UJ, England. Supported by a Kodak Bursary from the Royal College of Radiologists. Received October 24, 2003; revision requested January 13, 2004; revision received March 3; accepted April 8. Address correspondence to S.H. (e-mail: s.halligan@imperial.ac.uk).

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the relative accuracy of digital examination, anal endosonography, and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for preoperative assessment of fistula in ano by comparison to an outcome-derived reference standard.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ethical committee approval and informed consent were obtained. A total of 104 patients who were suspected of having fistula in ano underwent preoperative digital examination, 10-MHz anal endosonography, and body-coil MR imaging. Fistula classification was determined with each modality, with reviewers blinded to findings of other assessments. For fistula classification, an outcome-derived reference standard was based on a combination of subsequent surgical and MR imaging findings and clinical outcome after surgery. The proportion of patients correctly classified and agreement between the preoperative assessment and reference standard were determined with trend tests and {kappa} statistics, respectively.

RESULTS: There was a significant linear trend (P < .001) in the proportion of fistula tracks (n = 108) correctly classified with each modality, as follows: clinical examination, 66 (61%) patients; endosonography, 87 (81%) patients; MR imaging, 97 (90%) patients. Similar trends were found for the correct anatomic classification of abscesses (P < .001), horseshoe extensions (P = .003), and internal openings (n = 99, P < .001); endosonography was used to correctly identify the internal opening in 90 (91%) patients versus 96 (97%) patients with MR imaging. Agreement between the outcome-derived reference standard and digital examination, endosonography, and MR imaging for classification of the primary track was fair ({kappa} = 0.38), good ({kappa} = 0.68), and very good ({kappa} = 0.84), respectively, and fair ({kappa} = 0.29), good ({kappa} = 0.64), and very good ({kappa} = 0.88), respectively, for classification of abscesses and horseshoe extensions combined.

CONCLUSION: Endosonography with a high-frequency transducer is superior to digital examination for the preoperative classification of fistula in ano. While MR imaging remains superior in all respects, endosonography is a viable alternative for identification of the internal opening.

© RSNA, 2004

Index terms: Anus, abnormalities, 757.245 • Anus, MR, 757.1214 • Endoscopy, 757.1298 • Fistula, gastrointestinal tract, 757.245




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
BMJHome page
R. Greenhalgh, C R. Cohen, D. Burling, and S. A. Taylor
Investigating perianal pain of uncertain cause
BMJ, February 16, 2008; 336(7640): 387 - 389.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Diagnostic Medical SonographyHome page
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]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
Y. Hama, K. Makita, T. Yamana, and K. Dodanuki
Mucinous adenocarcinoma arising from fistula in ano: MRI findings.
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2006; 187(2): 517 - 521.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


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




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2004 by the Radiological Society of North America.