Authors
CORNELIUS P DOOLEY, ALAN W LARSON, NIGEL H STACE, IAN G RENNER, JORGE E VALENZUELA, JOAN ELIASOPH, PATRICK M COLLETTI, JAMES M HALLS, JOHN M WEINER
Publication date
1984/10/1
Journal
Annals of internal medicine
Volume
101
Issue
4
Pages
538-545
Publisher
American College of Physicians
Description
One hundred randomly selected inpatients were examined with both double-contrast barium meal and endoscopy in a blinded prospective fashion. All studies were done by staff personnel, with equal clinical information available to both the radiologist and endoscopist. The final diagnosis was made by a review committee of participating radiologists and endoscopists. Endoscopy was more sensitive (92% versus 54%, p < 0.001) and specific (100% versus 91%, p < 0.05) than the double-contrast barium meal. Both procedures significantly affected the clinical outcome of the patient, the effect of endoscopy being significantly greater than that of the double-contrast barium meal. Although errors with the barium study related predominantly to an inability to show subtle lesions, poor patient cooperation and perceptual and technical failures were additional significant factors. Endoscopy is recommended for certain groups …
Total citations
1985198619871988198919901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024413121959965656117996911105694958127714669118236
Scholar articles