BACKGROUND: The purpose of this prospective study was to determine the value of water-soluble contrast follow-through radiology in predicting the outcome in patients with small bowel obstruction. METHODS: Patients with clinical and radiological evidence of small bowel obstruction were selected according to pre-set criteria. A water-soluble contrast follow-through examination using 76% urografin was carried out within 24 h of hospital admission. The result was interpreted as 'significant obstruction' if the contrast failed to reach the caecum in 4 h or if there was a clear cut-off in the gastrointestinal tract. The result was interpreted as 'insignificant obstruction' if the contrast reached the caecum within 4 h. The surgeon was blinded to the result of the contrast examination in the patient management, and the decision to operate was based entirely on conventional clinical grounds. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients in an 18 month period underwent the contrast examinations. Thirty-four patients (67%) had previous abdominal operations. The results showed that significantly more patients who had 'significant obstruction' on contrast radiology required surgery to relieve the intestinal obstruction (17/19) than those who had "insignificant obstruction' (1/32; Fisher's exact test, P < 0.0001). This difference was found to be significant in both patient subgroups: patients with or without previous abdominal operation. There was no major morbidity or mortality related to the contrast radiology procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Urografin follow-through examination is a safe procedure; using 4 h as the cut-off it is highly predictive of the outcome in small bowel obstruction in patients with or without previous abdominal operation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chung et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: