These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Endoscopy versus x-ray studies of the gastrointestinal tract: future health care implications.
    Author: Tabibian N.
    Journal: South Med J; 1991 Feb; 84(2):219-21. PubMed ID: 1990457.
    Abstract:
    I did esophagogastroduodenoscopy in 147 patients and colonoscopy in 59 patients who had had gastrointestinal x-ray studies. The endoscopic procedure was done within 7 days after the x-ray study and/or while the patient was still symptomatic. The barium swallow findings were confirmed in only 40%; in the other 60%, the x-ray findings could not be confirmed. These unconfirmed x-ray findings were false-positive in 37.4%, false-negative in 16.3%, and suboptimal or nondiagnostic in 6.2%. The barium enema findings were confirmed in 32%. In the other 68%, the x-ray findings were false-positive in 42.3%, false-negative in 22%, and suboptimal in 3.3%. We conclude that in clinical or private practice, relying on x-ray studies alone may be associated with a high margin of diagnostic errors. When all factors are considered, the initial cost advantage of the x-ray studies appears to be lost. In future recommendations on the continuing dilemma of x-ray studies versus endoscopy, consideration should be given to factors other than the initial lower price of the x-ray studies.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]