Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Hosokawa, Takahiro
• Hosokawa, Mayumi
• Tanami, Yutaka
• Hattori, Shinya
• Sato, Yumiko
• Tanaka, Yujiro
• Kawashima, Hiroshi
• Oguma, Eiji
• Yamada, Yoshitake

Titel

Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracy for the Low‐Type Imperforate Anus Between Prone Cross‐Table Radiography and Sonography

Ist Teil von

• Journal of ultrasound in medicine, 2017-08, Vol.36 (8), p.1679-1686

Ort / Verlag

England

Erscheinungsjahr

2017

Quelle

Wiley-Blackwell Journals

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Objectives To compare the diagnostic accuracy for the low‐type imperforate anus between prone cross‐table radiography and sonography. Methods We included 20 neonates with imperforate anus: 13 with a surgically proven low type and 7 with an intermediate or high type. The distance between the distal rectal pouch and the perineum (pouch‐perineum distance) was measured by both sonography and prone cross‐table radiography. A previously established pouch‐perineum distance of 10 mm was used as the cutoff for diagnosis of a low‐type imperforate anus. The fistula location was also determined with sonography. We then compared the diagnostic accuracy of the imaging methods for a low‐type imperforate anus using the cutoff value of the pouch‐perineum distance alone and both the cutoff value of the pouch‐perineum distance and fistula location. The McNemar test was used for statistical analysis. Results With the use of only the pouch‐perineum distance, the diagnostic accuracy for the low‐type imperforate anus based on sonographic measurements was comparable with the accuracy achieved by prone cross‐table radiographic measurements (60.0% [12 of 20] versus 45.0% [9 of 20]; P = .625). With the use of the pouch‐perineum distance and fistula location, the diagnostic accuracy of sonography was significantly better than the accuracy of prone cross‐table radiography (90.0% [18 of 20] versus 45% [9 of 20]; P = .012). Conclusions The diagnostic accuracy of sonography for the low‐type imperforate anus based on both the pouch‐perineum distance and fistula location is better than that of prone cross‐table radiography. If the pouch‐perineum distance on prone cross‐table radiography is greater than 10 mm, a sonographic examination to determine the fistula location could be recommended.