Diseases of the colon and rectum · 1994
Magnetic resonance imaging of fistula-in-ano.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Lunniss P J, Barker P G, Sultan A H, Armstrong P, Reznek R H, Bartram C I, Cottam K S, Phillips R K
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Successful management of anal fistulas depends upon accurate assessment of the primary tract and any secondary extensions. Preoperative imaging has, to date, been disappointing.
METHODS: A prospective study of 35 patients with a clinical diagnosis of fistula-in-ano was performed comparing magnetic resonance imaging with the independently documented operative findings. Magnetic resonance imaging was also compared with anal endosonography in 20 patients.
RESULTS: Magnetic resonance imaging is accurate and demonstrates pathology missed at surgery by experienced coloproctologists. Magnetic resonance imaging is superior to anal endosonography.
CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance imaging is advocated as the method of choice when imaging is required for anal fistulas.
METHODS: A prospective study of 35 patients with a clinical diagnosis of fistula-in-ano was performed comparing magnetic resonance imaging with the independently documented operative findings. Magnetic resonance imaging was also compared with anal endosonography in 20 patients.
RESULTS: Magnetic resonance imaging is accurate and demonstrates pathology missed at surgery by experienced coloproctologists. Magnetic resonance imaging is superior to anal endosonography.
CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance imaging is advocated as the method of choice when imaging is required for anal fistulas.