Abdominal pathologies pose serious health problems as many are associated with complications. Plain AXRs and Ultrasound are widely used for diagnosis. The use of plain abdominal x-rays has been greatly criticized. It is against such criticisms that this cross sectional and retrospective study was aimed at comparing the use of the above mentioned imaging modalities in the diagnosis of abdominal pathologies. To achieve this objective, data was collected from the patients who came for the two exams using questionnaires and analyzed using SPSS, version 17.0. Out of the 72 patients, there were more males, 49(68.1%) than females, 23(31.9%), giving a male to female ratio of 2:1. Acute abdomen (35.71%) was the major indication for the exam. The major clinical symptom was abdominal pain (100%) in all the 12 patients involved in the cross sectional study. 33(45.8%) patients had normal results on AXR while 39(54.17%) had abnormal results. Comparing with ultrasound, 20(27.78%) results were normal and 52(72.22%) results were abnormal giving sensitivities of 54.17% and 72.22% for AXR and ultrasound respectively. GIT pathologies in US registered 35(67.37%) cases while abdominal x-ray recorded 29(76.92%) cases. Conclusively, US is more efficient in the diagnosis of abdominal pathologies than AXR. However, the use of AXR in bowel obstruction, perforation, renal stones will improve US diagnosis. Therefore, the two imaging modalities should be used complimentarily.
| Published in | World Journal of Public Health (Volume 2, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.wjph.20170201.12 |
| Page(s) | 8-17 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2016. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Abdominal, X-ray, Ultrasound, Pathologies, Cameroon
| [1] | Jain P. K., Liyakat A., Mishra H., Arora N. (2014), “Comparative Study of Plain X ray Abdomen, Ultrasonography and CT Diagnosis of Non-Traumatic Acute Abdomen”, International Journal of Medical And Apllied Sciences, Vol. 3, no. 4, p.p. 253-259. |
| [2] | Hardy. A., Bennet. B., & Crandal. M., (2013). “The Evaluation of the Acute Abdomen”. In Moore. L. J., Turner. K. L., Todd. S. R., (Eds). Common Problems in Acute Care Surgery (Vol. 17, P. P. 20-31). New York: Springer Science. |
| [3] | Syed M. F., Nazish. N., Fatima B. Z. & Adeebul H. R. (2014) “Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasound and X ray KUB in Ureteric Colic, Taking CT as Gold Standard”, International Journal of Endorsing Health Science Research. Vol 2, no 1, p.p 22-27. |
| [4] | Sharma P, Sidharth, Sing BP, Sing D and Gupta A (2010) “Comparative Study Between Plain Radiography and Ultrasound Abdomen in Non-Traumatic Surgical Acute Abdominal Conditions”, Nepalese Journal of Radiology, Vol. 2, No 2, p.p 20-27. |
| [5] | Gupta K, Bhandari R. K, Chande R. (2005), “Comparative study of plain abdomen and ultrasound in non-traumatic acute abdomen”, Indian Journal, Radiology Imaging, no 15, pp 15-109, cited in Sharma P. Sidharth, Singh B. P, Sing D, Gupta A [2010] “Comparative Study Between Plain Radiography and Ultrasound Abdomen in Non-Traumatic Surgical Acute Abdominal Conditions”, Nepalese Journal of Radiology, Vol. 2, no3. |
| [6] | Prakash, Sharma, Sidharth, BP Singh, D Singh, A Gupta (2012) “Comparative Study of Plain Abdomen and Ultrasound in Non-Traumatic Acute Abdomen” Nepalese Journal of Radiology, Vol. 2, no 2, pp 20-27. |
| [7] | Choi. S. Y., Wong. T. W., Lau. C. C., Liang. E., Fu. Y. K., Khoo. J., (2002), “A Study on the use of abdominal x rays in the emergency department”. Hong Kong Journal of Emergency Medicine, Vol.9, P. P. 30-33. |
| [8] | Aviral, Chana. S. R, Ahmad. I., (2005). “Role of Ultrasonography in the Evaluation of Children with Acute Abdomen in the Emergency set up”, Indian Association of Pediatric Surgery, vol 10, no. 10. |
| [9] | Gupta. K, Bhandari R. K, Chander. R (2005) “Comparative Study of Plain Abdomen and Ultrasound in Non-Traumatic Acute Abdomen”. Idian Journal Radiologic Imaging. Vol. 1, p.p. 109-115. |
| [10] | Scanlon. V., Tna. S., (2007). Essentials of Anatomy and Physiology. E. A. Davis Company, Philadelphia. |
APA Style
Nchanji Nkeh Keneth, Samuel Nambile Cumber, Bongkiynuy Nancy, Shalom Jaila, Jackson Jr Nforbewing Ndenkeh, et al. (2016). Comparative Study Between Plain Abdominal X-Ray and Abdominal Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Abdominal Pathologies at the Bafoussam Regional Hospital Cameroon. World Journal of Public Health, 2(1), 8-17. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.wjph.20170201.12
ACS Style
Nchanji Nkeh Keneth; Samuel Nambile Cumber; Bongkiynuy Nancy; Shalom Jaila; Jackson Jr Nforbewing Ndenkeh, et al. Comparative Study Between Plain Abdominal X-Ray and Abdominal Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Abdominal Pathologies at the Bafoussam Regional Hospital Cameroon. World J. Public Health 2016, 2(1), 8-17. doi: 10.11648/j.wjph.20170201.12
AMA Style
Nchanji Nkeh Keneth, Samuel Nambile Cumber, Bongkiynuy Nancy, Shalom Jaila, Jackson Jr Nforbewing Ndenkeh, et al. Comparative Study Between Plain Abdominal X-Ray and Abdominal Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Abdominal Pathologies at the Bafoussam Regional Hospital Cameroon. World J Public Health. 2016;2(1):8-17. doi: 10.11648/j.wjph.20170201.12
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.wjph.20170201.12,
author = {Nchanji Nkeh Keneth and Samuel Nambile Cumber and Bongkiynuy Nancy and Shalom Jaila and Jackson Jr Nforbewing Ndenkeh and Mayennin Nabilatu Kinyuy},
title = {Comparative Study Between Plain Abdominal X-Ray and Abdominal Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Abdominal Pathologies at the Bafoussam Regional Hospital Cameroon},
journal = {World Journal of Public Health},
volume = {2},
number = {1},
pages = {8-17},
doi = {10.11648/j.wjph.20170201.12},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.wjph.20170201.12},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.wjph.20170201.12},
abstract = {Abdominal pathologies pose serious health problems as many are associated with complications. Plain AXRs and Ultrasound are widely used for diagnosis. The use of plain abdominal x-rays has been greatly criticized. It is against such criticisms that this cross sectional and retrospective study was aimed at comparing the use of the above mentioned imaging modalities in the diagnosis of abdominal pathologies. To achieve this objective, data was collected from the patients who came for the two exams using questionnaires and analyzed using SPSS, version 17.0. Out of the 72 patients, there were more males, 49(68.1%) than females, 23(31.9%), giving a male to female ratio of 2:1. Acute abdomen (35.71%) was the major indication for the exam. The major clinical symptom was abdominal pain (100%) in all the 12 patients involved in the cross sectional study. 33(45.8%) patients had normal results on AXR while 39(54.17%) had abnormal results. Comparing with ultrasound, 20(27.78%) results were normal and 52(72.22%) results were abnormal giving sensitivities of 54.17% and 72.22% for AXR and ultrasound respectively. GIT pathologies in US registered 35(67.37%) cases while abdominal x-ray recorded 29(76.92%) cases. Conclusively, US is more efficient in the diagnosis of abdominal pathologies than AXR. However, the use of AXR in bowel obstruction, perforation, renal stones will improve US diagnosis. Therefore, the two imaging modalities should be used complimentarily.},
year = {2016}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparative Study Between Plain Abdominal X-Ray and Abdominal Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Abdominal Pathologies at the Bafoussam Regional Hospital Cameroon AU - Nchanji Nkeh Keneth AU - Samuel Nambile Cumber AU - Bongkiynuy Nancy AU - Shalom Jaila AU - Jackson Jr Nforbewing Ndenkeh AU - Mayennin Nabilatu Kinyuy Y1 - 2016/12/14 PY - 2016 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.wjph.20170201.12 DO - 10.11648/j.wjph.20170201.12 T2 - World Journal of Public Health JF - World Journal of Public Health JO - World Journal of Public Health SP - 8 EP - 17 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2637-6059 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.wjph.20170201.12 AB - Abdominal pathologies pose serious health problems as many are associated with complications. Plain AXRs and Ultrasound are widely used for diagnosis. The use of plain abdominal x-rays has been greatly criticized. It is against such criticisms that this cross sectional and retrospective study was aimed at comparing the use of the above mentioned imaging modalities in the diagnosis of abdominal pathologies. To achieve this objective, data was collected from the patients who came for the two exams using questionnaires and analyzed using SPSS, version 17.0. Out of the 72 patients, there were more males, 49(68.1%) than females, 23(31.9%), giving a male to female ratio of 2:1. Acute abdomen (35.71%) was the major indication for the exam. The major clinical symptom was abdominal pain (100%) in all the 12 patients involved in the cross sectional study. 33(45.8%) patients had normal results on AXR while 39(54.17%) had abnormal results. Comparing with ultrasound, 20(27.78%) results were normal and 52(72.22%) results were abnormal giving sensitivities of 54.17% and 72.22% for AXR and ultrasound respectively. GIT pathologies in US registered 35(67.37%) cases while abdominal x-ray recorded 29(76.92%) cases. Conclusively, US is more efficient in the diagnosis of abdominal pathologies than AXR. However, the use of AXR in bowel obstruction, perforation, renal stones will improve US diagnosis. Therefore, the two imaging modalities should be used complimentarily. VL - 2 IS - 1 ER -
Email: