Help
Subscribe


GastroHep.com - the global online resource for all aspects of gastroenterology, hepatology and endoscopy

 29 June 2016

Advanced search
GastroHep.com - the global online resource for all aspects of gastroenterology, hepatology and endoscopy Profile of Roy Pounder

Home

News  
Journals
Review Articles
Slide Atlas
Video Clips
Online Books
Advanced Digestive Endoscopy
Classical Cases
Conference Diary
PubMed
International GH Links
USA GH Links
National GH Links
National GI Societies
Other Useful Links




Emails on Gastroenterology and Hepatology
the National AIDS Treatment Advocacy Project
Visit the gastroenterology section of the EUMS

News

Toward an evidence-based approach in diagnosing diverticulitis

The latest issue of the Scandanavian Journal of Gastroenterology evaluates the accuracy of the clinical evaluation and diagnostic modalities for patients with suspected acute colonic diverticulitis.

News image

The lack of pathognomonic findings and the chance of complicated disease have resulted in the widespread use of additional imaging to diagnose acute colonic diverticulitis.

The added value of additional imaging in the diagnostic workup of patients suspected of acute colonic diverticulitis is not well defined.

Dr Caroline Suzanne Andeweg and colleagues systematically reviewed the literature of the accuracy of the clinical evaluation and diagnostic modalities for patients with suspected acute colonic diverticulitis, to come to an evidence-based approach to diagnose acute colonic diverticulitis.

The team performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that reported diagnostic accuracy of the clinical diagnosis and diagnostic modalities in patients with suspected diverticulitis.

Study quality was assessed with the STARD checklist.

Sensitivity of contrast enema studies varied between 80% and 83%
Scandanavian Journal of Gastroenterology

True-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative findings were extracted and pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity per diagnostic test were calculated, if applicable.

The research team noted that the overall quality of the studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical diagnosis, contrast enema and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were moderate to poor and not suitable for meta-analysis.

Sensitivity of the clinical diagnosis varied between 64% and 68%.

Ultrasound (US) and computed tomography (CT) studies were eligible for meta-analysis.

The team found that summary sensitivity estimates for US were 90% versus 95% for CT.

Summary specificity estimates for US were 90% versus 96% for CT.

The researchers found that the sensitivity for MRI was 98% and specificity varied between 70% and 78%.

Sensitivity of contrast enema studies varied between 80% and 83%.

Dr Andeweg's team concludes, "In two-thirds of the patients, the diagnosis of acute colonic diverticulitis can be made based on clinical evaluation alone."

"In one-third of the patients, additional imaging is a necessity to establish the diagnosis."

"US and CT are comparable in diagnosing diverticulitis and superior to other modalities."

"CT has the advantage of higher specificity and the ability to identify alternative diagnoses."

"The role of MRI is not yet clear in diagnosing acute colonic diverticulitis."

"Contrast enema is considered an obsolete imaging technique to diagnose acute colonic diverticulitis based on lower sensitivity and specificity than US and CT."

"A step-up approach with CT performed after an inconclusive or negative US, seems a logical and safe approach for patients suspected of acute colonic diverticulitis."

Scand J Gastroenterol 2014: 49(7): 775-784
15 July 2014

Go to top of page Email this page Email this page to a colleague

 29 June 2016 
Progression to esophageal carcinoma in Barrett's
 29 June 2016 
Hep C eradication in people who inject drugs
 29 June 2016 
Anti-tumor necrosis factor in mothers and newborns
 28 June 2016 
Gastric cancer screening in the USA
 28 June 2016 
Acute severe ulcerative colitis
 28 June 2016 
Cancer recurrence after immune-suppressive therapies
 27 June 2016 
Epidemiology of NAFLD
 27 June 2016 
Tobacco smoking and ulcerative colitis
 27 June 2016 
The Toronto Consensus for H. pylori treatment
 24 June 2016 
Dietary trends in the USA
 24 June 2016 
Statins and colorectal cancer in IBD
 24 June 2016 
Fibre for chronic idiopathic constipation
 23 June 2016 
Biomarker for eosinophilic esophagitis diagnosis
 23 June 2016 
Touch screens in the IBD outpatient clinic
 23 June 2016 
Adverse events after colonoscopy bowel preparations
 22 June 2016 
Benefits and harms of colorectal cancer screening
 22 June 2016 
IBS symptoms in IBD
 22 June 2016 
Outcomes among US veterans with Hep B
 21 June 2016 
Screening for colorectal cancer
 21 June 2016 
Tenofovir and Hep B transmission in mothers
 21 June 2016 
Access to liver subspecialty care and survival
 20 June 2016 
Genes for colorectal cancer risk
 20 June 2016 
Patients and gastroenterologists’ perceptions on IBD
 20 June 2016 
Hep C treatment in people who inject drugs
 17 June 2016 
Noninvasive markers of liver fibrosis
 17 June 2016 
Predictors of starting with long-term PPIs
 17 June 2016 
Extrahepatic manifestations of Hep C
 16 June 2016 
Assessing progression of NAFLD
 16 June 2016 
Endotracheal intubation and endoscopy unit efficiency metrics
 16 June 2016 
Bile acid diarrhea
 15 June 2016 
Consensus for acute severe ulcerative colitis
 15 June 2016 
Dental erosions in GERD
 15 June 2016 
Pharmacological treatments for obesity with weight loss
 14 June 2016 
Antibiotics and gut inflammation
 14 June 2016 
Liver-related mortality in the developed world
 14 June 2016 
Hep C patient outcomes treated with different anti-viral regimens
 13 June 2016 
Obesity in the USA
 13 June 2016 
Celiac disease drug development
 13 June 2016 
Pneumonia risk in celiac disease
 10 June 2016 

Celiac disease drug development

 10 June 2016 
Rectal cancer surgery checklist
 10 June 2016 
Breath as a marker for IBS
 09 June 2016 
Psychological morbidity in young people with IBD
 09 June 2016 
Evaluation of endoscopic findings from patients with Crohn's
 09 June 2016 
Predicting hepatic encephalopathy in cirrhosis
 08 June 2016 
Adult obesity trends in the USA
 08 June 2016 
Pediatric IBD unclassified vs other IBD
 08 June 2016 
Dark chocolate and NASH oxidation
 07 June 2016 
Flexible endoscopy for Zenker's diverticulum
 07 June 2016 
Predicting risk of hepatic encephalopathy in cirrhosis
 07 June 2016 
Electronic learning system for colon capsule endoscopy
 06 June 2016 
Oral contraceptives and Crohn’s complications
 06 June 2016 
Disturbed sleep and symptoms in IBS
 06 June 2016 
Eosinophilic esophagitis
 03 June 2016 
Antibiotic prophylaxis in cirrhosis
 03 June 2016 
Mortality in hospitalized peptic ulcer patients
 03 June 2016 
Decision aid for surgical patients with ulcerative colitis
 02 June 2016 
Allergy tests for eosinophilic esophagitis
 02 June 2016 
Fatty liver disease and mortality
 02 June 2016 
Ethnic inequalities in rectal cancer care

Blackwell Publishing


GastroHep.com is a Blackwell Publishing registered trademark
© 2016 Wiley-Blackwell and GastroHep.com and contributors
Privacy Statement
Disclaimer
About Us