HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 2333032063v1 233/3/750    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Jaffe, T. A. Articles by Paulson, E. K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Jaffe, T. A. Articles by Paulson, E. K.

Practice Patterns in Percutaneous Image-guided Intraabdominal Abscess Drainage: Survey of Academic and Private Practice Centers¹

¹ From the Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Box 3808, Durham, NC 27710. From the 2003 RSNA scientific assembly. Received December 18, 2003; revision requested February 20, 2004; revision received May 12; accepted June 2. Address correspondence to T.A.J. (e-mail: jaffe002@mc.duke.edu).

PURPOSE: To evaluate current practice patterns of percutaneous image-guided abdominal and pelvic abscess drainage in academic and private practice centers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board did not require approval for this study. In a survey conducted between November 2002 and February 2003, 493 questionnaires were sent to 193 academic and 300 private practice radiology departments in the United States. All recipients were informed of the study purpose. The survey included questions about departmental demographics, patient selection criteria for percutaneous abscess drainage (eg, abscess diameter at imaging, laboratory parameters such as white blood cell count, and clinical indications such as fever), use of analgesia or conscious sedation, drainage method, and imaging technique. The statistical significance of differences between respondent subgroups was analyzed with a Pearson or Mantel-Haenszel ² test.

RESULTS: Academic centers returned 95 questionnaires (49%), and private practice centers, 72 (24%). Percutaneous abscess drainage is performed by a fellowship-trained radiologist at 92 (97%) of 95 academic centers and 41 (79%) of 52 private practice centers (P < .001). Among 95 academic respondents and 52 private practice respondents, respectively, 56 (59%) and 33 (63%) do not perform drainage if an abscess has a diameter of less than 3 cm; 30 (32%) and nine (17%), if the white blood cell count is normal; and 16 (17%) and six (12%), if the patient is afebrile. Most (90 [95%] of 95 academic, 45 [87%] of 52 private practice) respondents use conscious sedation. A transabdominal approach and 8–12-F catheters are most frequently used by both groups. Academic respondents more frequently use transvaginal and transrectal approaches (54 [57%] and 51 [54%] of 95, vs 16 [31%] and 15 [29%] of 52 private practice respondents; P = .003) and 14-F catheters (69 [73%] of 95 vs 18 [35%] of 52; P < .001).

CONCLUSION: Percutaneous drainage is usually performed by fellowship-trained radiologists in abscesses of more than 3 cm in diameter, for appropriate clinical indications (multiple parameters above the established threshold), by using conscious sedation and 8–12-F catheters.

© RSNA, 2004

Index terms: Abscess, 70.21, 80.211 • Abscess, percutaneous drainage, 70.1263, 80.1263 • Catheters and catheterization, technology • Interventional procedures, utilization • Radiology and radiologists

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. A. Jaffe, C. M. Miller, and E. M. Merkle Practice Patterns in Imaging of the Pregnant Patient with Abdominal Pain: A Survey of Academic Centers Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2007; 189(5): 1128 - 1134. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]