Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU · 2011
Comparison of three types of preparations for abdominal sonography.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Pinto Paula N V, Chojniak Rubens, Cohen Marcela P, Yu Liao S, Queiroz-Andrade Marcony, Bitencourt Almir G V
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The purpose of this randomized, prospective study was to evaluate the effect of three preparation types on the abdominal sonographic examination quality and on patient acceptance.
METHODS: Examinations were performed on 611 patients in the imaging department of a referral oncology center. Patients were divided into three groups: preparation with fasting, water, laxatives, and antiflatulents (Group I), preparation with fasting, water, and antiflatulents alone (Group II), or preparation with fasting and water alone (Group III). The examination quality was evaluated both objectively through grades and subjectively through impressions. Statistical significance was set at the p ≤ 0.05 level.
RESULTS: No difference in examination quality was seen among patients with or without medication. Improved visualization of the retroperitoneum in the mid abdomen was observed among Group I patients. Patients in Groups II and III displayed fewer side effects. Other variables, such as obesity and increased abdominal wall thickness, also impacted the image quality.
CONCLUSIONS: Visualization of the abdominal organs was satisfactory even in patients who had only fasted and received water. The use of laxative and antiflatulent preparations is not required before routine abdominal ultrasound examinations.
METHODS: Examinations were performed on 611 patients in the imaging department of a referral oncology center. Patients were divided into three groups: preparation with fasting, water, laxatives, and antiflatulents (Group I), preparation with fasting, water, and antiflatulents alone (Group II), or preparation with fasting and water alone (Group III). The examination quality was evaluated both objectively through grades and subjectively through impressions. Statistical significance was set at the p ≤ 0.05 level.
RESULTS: No difference in examination quality was seen among patients with or without medication. Improved visualization of the retroperitoneum in the mid abdomen was observed among Group I patients. Patients in Groups II and III displayed fewer side effects. Other variables, such as obesity and increased abdominal wall thickness, also impacted the image quality.
CONCLUSIONS: Visualization of the abdominal organs was satisfactory even in patients who had only fasted and received water. The use of laxative and antiflatulent preparations is not required before routine abdominal ultrasound examinations.