The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparative Evaluation of Plain Films, Ultrasound and CT in the Diagnosis of Intestinal Obstruction
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Maung, A. A., Johnson, D. C., Piper, G. L., Barbosa, R. R., Rowell, S. E., Bokhari, F., Collins, J. N., Gordon, J. R., Ra, J. H., & Kerwin, A. J. (2012) · Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery · doi:10.1097/ta.0b013e31827019de · Cited by 288
European Guideline on Chronic Nausea and Vomiting—A UEG and ESNM Consensus for Clinical Management
Malagelada, C., Keller, J., Sifrim, D., Serra, J., Tack, J., Mulak, A., Stengel, A., Aguilar, A., Drewes, A. M., Josefsson, A., et al. (2025) · United European Gastroenterology Journal · doi:10.1002/ueg2.12711 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Suri, S., Gupta, S., Sudhakar, P. J., Venkataramu, N. K., Sood, B., & Wig, J. D.
- Venue
- Acta Radiologica
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- 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.