Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 252

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparative Evaluation of Plain Films, Ultrasound and CT in the Diagnosis of Intestinal Obstruction

Suri, S., Gupta, S., Sudhakar, P. J., Venkataramu, N. K., Sood, B., Wig, J. D.·1999·Acta Radiologica

Abstract

Background: There are limited studies in the literature comparing plain radiography, US and CT in the evaluation of intestinal obstruction. We carried out this prospective study to compare the relative efficacies of these three imaging techniques in patients with intestinal obstruction. Material and Methods: Thirty-two patients presenting with clinical suspicion of intestinal obstruction were subjected to plain radiography, US and CT and the findings were compared with reference to the presence or absence of obstruction, the level of obstruction and the cause of obstruction. The final diagnosis was obtained by surgery (n=25), or by contrast studies and/or clinical follow-up in those who were treated conservatively (n=7). Results: Out of 32 patients, 30 had mechanical intestinal obstruction (22 had small bowel obstruction and 8 had large bowel obstruction). Of the remaining 2 patients, 1 had adynamic ileus and the other had a mesenteric cyst. CT had high sensitivity (93%), specificity (100%) and accuracy (94%) in diagnosing the presence of obstruction. The comparable sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were, respectively, 83%, 100% and 84% for US and 77%, 50% and 75% for plain radiography. The level of obstruction was correctly predicted in 93% on CT, in 70% on US and in 60% on plain films. CT was superior (87%) to both US (23%) and plain radiography (7%) in determining the aetiology of obstruction. Conclusion: CT is a highly accurate method in the evaluation of intestinal obstruction especially for determining the level and cause of obstruction and should be the technique of choice when clinical or plain radiographic findings are equivocal.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/02841859909177758

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 252

Metadata

Authors
Suri, S., Gupta, S., Sudhakar, P. J., Venkataramu, N. K., Sood, B., & Wig, J. D.
Venue
Acta Radiologica
Published
1999-07
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
422-428
ISSN
  • 0284-1851 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0455
OpenAlex
W2110671097
Cited by
252
References
0
FWCI
8.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative Evaluation of Plain Films, Ultrasound and CT in the Diagnosis of Intestinal Obstruction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3109/02841859909177758
The paper
Suri, S., Gupta, S., Sudhakar, P. J., Venkataramu, N. K., Sood, B., & Wig, J. D. (1999). Comparative Evaluation of Plain Films, Ultrasound and CT in the Diagnosis of Intestinal Obstruction. Acta Radiologica. https://doi.org/10.3109/02841859909177758

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.