Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=26676232
&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\26676232
.jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117 J+Ultrason
2014 ; 14
(57
): 142-51
Nephropedia Template TP
gab.com Text
Twit Text FOAVip
Twit Text #
English Wikipedia
Endosonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of high anal
fistulae - a comparison
#MMPMID26676232
Sudo?-Szopi?ska I
; Kucharczyk A
; Ko?odziejczak M
; Warczy?ska A
; Praco? G
; Wi?czek A
J Ultrason
2014[Jun]; 14
(57
): 142-51
PMID26676232
show ga
Anal fistula is a benign inflammatory disease with unclear etiology which
develops in approximately 10 in 100 000 adult patients. Surgical treatment of
fistulae is associated with a risk of damaging anal sphincters. This usually
happens in treating high fistulae, branched fistulae, and anterior ones in
females. In preoperative diagnosis of anal fistulae, endosonography and magnetic
resonance imaging play a significant role in planning the surgical technique. The
majority of fistulae are diagnosed in endosonography, but magnetic resonance is
performed when the presence of high fistulae, particularly branched ones, and
recurrent is suspected. THE AIM OF THIS PAPER: The aim of this paper was to
compare the roles of the two examinations in preoperative assessment of high anal
fistulae. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The results of endosonographic and magnetic
resonance examinations performed in 2011-2012 in 14 patients (4 women and 10 men)
with high anal fistulae diagnosed intraoperatively were subject to a
retrospective analysis. The patients were aged from 23 to 66 (mean 47). The
endosonographic examinations were performed with the use of a BK Medical Pro
Focus system with endorectal 3D transducers with the frequency of 16 MHz. The
magnetic resonance scans were performed using a Siemens Avanto 1.5 T scanner with
a surface coil in T1, T1FS, FLAIR, T2 sequences and in T1 following contrast
medium administration. The sensitivity and specificity of endosonography and
magnetic resonance imaging were analyzed. A surgical treatment served as a method
for verification. The agreement of each method with the surgery and the agreement
of endosonography and magnetic resonance imaging were compared in terms of the
assessment of the fistula type, localization of its internal opening and
branches. The agreement level was determined based on the percentage of
consistent assessments and Cohen's coefficient of agreement, ?. The integrity of
the anal sphincters was assessed in each case. RESULTS: In determining the
fistula type, magnetic resonance imaging agreed with intraoperative assessment in
79% of cases, and endosonography in 64% of cases. Endosonography agreed with
magnetic resonance in 57% of cases. In the assessment of internal opening, the
agreement between endosonography and intraoperative assessment was 65%, between
magnetic resonance and intraoperative assessment - 41% and between endosonography
and magnetic resonance - 53%. In the assessment of fistula branches,
endosonography agreed with intraoperative assessment in 67% of cases, magnetic
resonance in 87% of cases, and the agreement between the two methods tested was
67%. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance is a more accurate method than
endosonography in determining the type of high fistulae and the presence of
branches. In assessing the internal opening, endosonography proved more accurate.
The agreement between the two methods ranges from 53-67%; the highest level of
agreement was noted for the assessment of branching.
free
free
free
