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: Esophagography after pneumomediastinum without CT findings of esophageal perforation: is it necessary?
    Author: Wu CH, Chen CM, Chen CC, Wong YC, Wang CJ, Lo WC, Wang LJ.
    Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Nov; 201(5):977-84. PubMed ID: 24147467.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to determine the necessity of fluoroscopic esophagography in patients with pneumomediastinum on CT but without CT findings of esophageal perforation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2010, there were 4305 fluoroscopic esophagography examinations including 533 with CT identified from a search of our PACS. Patients with pneumomediastinum on CT who were subsequently referred for emergent fluoroscopic esophagography to exclude esophageal perforation were enrolled. Fluoroscopic esophagography examinations performed within 3 days of CT were included. Patients with a history of esophageal disease were excluded. As a result, 103 patients were enrolled in the study; patients were divided into groups on the basis of whether there was additional clinical history of esophageal damage (trauma group) or not (nontrauma group). Images were reviewed by two board-certified radiologists blinded to the clinical data and radiologic reports for the presence or absence of esophageal perforation. A positive result on CT was defined as esophageal injury or periesophageal infiltration that coexisted with periesophageal air. A positive fluoroscopic esophagography result was defined as oral contrast medium leakage from the esophagus. RESULTS: Esophageal perforation was diagnosed in 15 of the 103 patients. The CT findings were significantly correlated with esophageal perforation (p < 0.001 in the trauma group, and p = 0.001 in the nontrauma group). The respective sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) of CT versus fluoroscopic esophagography in the trauma group were 100% versus 66.7% and 100% versus 87.9%; in the nontrauma group, the sensitivity and NPV were 100% for CT and fluoroscopic esophagography. Thus, the sensitivity and NPV of CT were either superior or equal to those of fluoroscopic esophagography. CONCLUSION: The results of our study suggest that performing fluoroscopic esophagography in patients with pneumomediastinum is unnecessary when CT is negative for esophageal perforation.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]