Article Sidebar

PDF
Date Published: 18/10/2022
Online Published: 18/10/2022
Abstract Views: 447
Views PDF: 223
DOI: https://doi.org/10.58490/ctump.2022i52.291
Issue
No. 52 (2022)
Section
Article
How to Cite
Nguyen, P. T., & Nguyen, V. H. (2022). IMAGING ASSESSMENT OF GASTRODUODENAL PERFORATION ON THE COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY. Cantho Journal of Medicine and Pharmacy, 52, 151-158. https://doi.org/10.58490/ctump.2022i52.291

IMAGING ASSESSMENT OF GASTRODUODENAL PERFORATION ON THE COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY

Phuoc Thuyet Nguyen1,, Van Hai Nguyen2
1 1. Hoan My Sai Gon Hospital
2 2. Uuniversity of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City

Main Article Content

Abstract

Background: Computed tomography has been increasingly used in the investigation of patients with suspected gastroduodenal perforation. Recently, more new findings, which are effective in diagnostising perforation, have bee described. Objectives: To investigate the imaging features of gastroduodenal perforation on CT-scan. Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 34 patients who had intraoperative diagnosis of gastroduodenal perforations at Hoan My Sai Gon Hospital, from October 2019 to September 2021. All of their abdominal CT-scan with intravenous contrast injection and plain upright films within 12 hours before surgery were reviewed. Results: The mean age of patients was 52.2±21.5 years with the youngest and oldest age being 16 and 88 years. The causes of perforation were peptic ulcer (94.1%), gastric tumor (2.9%), gastrointestinal foreign bodies (2.9%). On CT-scan, the four most common signs of gastroduodenal perforations with decreasing frequency were: (1) Wall defect (97.1%), (2) Free air in the abdomen (97.1%), (3) Thickening of the gastroduodenal wall adjacent to the perforation (88.2%), (4) Intraabdominal free fluid (73.5%). The specific sites of free air in gastroduodenal perforation in decreasing frequency were: (1) Around the liver (79.4%), (2) The liver hilum (73.5%), (3) Adjacent to the falciform ligament (64.7%), (4) Adjacent to perforation (64.7%). Conclusions: The important signs of gastroduodenal perforation on CT-scan with decreasing frequency are: (1) Loss of normal gastroduodenal mucosal integrity, (2) Free air in the abdomen, (3) Thickening of the gastroduodenal wall adjacent to the perforation, and (4) Free fluid in the abdomen.

Article Details

Keywords

Gastroduodenal perforation, computed tomography

References

1. Cadenas RL et al. (2013), Use of multidetector computed tomography for locating the site of gastrointestinal tract perforations. Cir Esp, 91(5), pp.316-23.
2. Celik H et al. (2021), Accuracy of specific free air distributions in predicting the localization of gastrointestinal perforations. Emergency Radiology.
3. Cho HS et al. (2009), Distinction between upper and lower gastrointestinal perforation: Usefulness of the periportal free air sign on computed tomography. Eur J Radiol, 69(1), pp.108-13.
4. Choi AL et al. (2011), What determines the periportal free air, and ligamentum teres and falciform ligament signs on CT: Can these specific air distributions be valuable predictors of gastroduodenal perforation?. Eur J Radiol, 77(2), pp.319-24.
5. Drakopoulos D et al. (2021), Correlation of gastrointestinal perforation location and amount of free air and ascites on CT imaging. Abdom Radiol (NY), 46(10), pp.4536-4547.
6. Grassi R et al. (2004), Gastro-duodenal perforations: Conventional plain film, US and CT findings in 166 consecutive patients. Eur J Radiol, 50(1), pp.30-6.
7. Hainaux B et al. (2006), Accuracy of MDCT in predicting site of gastrointestinal tract perforation. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 187(5), pp.1179-83.
8. Kim HC et al. (2014), Gastrointestinal tract perforation: Evaluation of MDCT according to perforation site and elapsed time. European Radiology, 24(6), pp.1386-1393.
9. Lee D et al. (2016), Multidetector CT diagnosis of non-traumatic gastroduodenal perforation. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol, 60(2), pp.182-6.
10. Lee NK et al. (2020), CT diagnosis of non-traumatic gastrointestinal perforation: An emphasis on the causes. Jpn J Radiol, 38(2), pp.101-111.
11. Nouri D et al. (2021), Effects of sex, age, size and location of perforation on the sensitivity of erect chest X-ray for gastroduodenal perforation. Radiography, 27(4), pp.1158-1161.
12. Oguro S et al. (2010), 64-Slice multidetector computed tomography evaluation of gastrointestinal tract perforation site: Detectability of direct findings in upper and lower GI tract. Eur Radiol, 20(6), pp.1396-403.
13. Toprak H et al. (2019), Multidetector CT findings in gastrointestinal tract perforation that can help prediction of perforation site accurately. Clin Radiol, 74(9), pp.736.e1-736.e7.