World journal of gastroenterology · 2009
Three-dimensional endoanal ultrasonographic assessment of an anal fistula with and without H(2)O(2) enhancement.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Yung, Park Young Jin
Аннотация
AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of three-dimensional endoanal ultrasound (3D-EAUS) in the assessment of anal fistulae with and without H(2)O(2) enhancement.
METHODS: Sixty-one patients (37 males, aged 17-74 years) with anal fistulae, which were not simple low types, were evaluated by physical examination and 3D-EAUS with and without enhancement. Fistula classification was determined with each modality and compared to operative findings as the reference standard.
RESULTS: The accuracy of 3D-EAUS was significantly higher than that of physical examination in detecting the primary tract (84.4% vs 68.7%, P = 0.037) and secondary extension (81.8% vs 62.1%, P = 0.01) and localizing the internal opening (84.2% vs 59.7%, P = 0.004). A contrast study with H(2)O(2) detected several more fistula components including two primary suprasphincteric fistula tracks and one supralevator secondary extension, which were not detected on non-contrast study. However, there was no significant difference in accuracy between 3D-EAUS and H(2)O(2)-enhanced 3D-EAUS with respect to classification of the primary tract (84.4% vs 89.1%, P = 0.435) or secondary extension (81.8% vs 86.4%, P = 0.435) or localization of the internal opening (84.2% vs 89.5%, P = 0.406).
CONCLUSION: 3D-EAUS was highly reliable in the diagnosis of an anal fistula. H(2)O(2) enhancement was helpful at times and selective use in difficult cases may be economical and reliable.
METHODS: Sixty-one patients (37 males, aged 17-74 years) with anal fistulae, which were not simple low types, were evaluated by physical examination and 3D-EAUS with and without enhancement. Fistula classification was determined with each modality and compared to operative findings as the reference standard.
RESULTS: The accuracy of 3D-EAUS was significantly higher than that of physical examination in detecting the primary tract (84.4% vs 68.7%, P = 0.037) and secondary extension (81.8% vs 62.1%, P = 0.01) and localizing the internal opening (84.2% vs 59.7%, P = 0.004). A contrast study with H(2)O(2) detected several more fistula components including two primary suprasphincteric fistula tracks and one supralevator secondary extension, which were not detected on non-contrast study. However, there was no significant difference in accuracy between 3D-EAUS and H(2)O(2)-enhanced 3D-EAUS with respect to classification of the primary tract (84.4% vs 89.1%, P = 0.435) or secondary extension (81.8% vs 86.4%, P = 0.435) or localization of the internal opening (84.2% vs 89.5%, P = 0.406).
CONCLUSION: 3D-EAUS was highly reliable in the diagnosis of an anal fistula. H(2)O(2) enhancement was helpful at times and selective use in difficult cases may be economical and reliable.