Skip to main content
Log in

False-negative barium enema in patients with sigmoid cancer and coexistent diverticula

  • Published:
Gastrointestinal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The false-negative rate of barium enema examinations for the recognition of polypoid sigmoid cancer was evaluated in 167 patients with histologically proven carcinoma. The cases were classified according to the coexistence of sigmoid diverticula. In patients with less than 15 diverticula, 3.1% of lesions were missed, while in those with more than 15 diverticula, 20.4% of tumors were undetected. The overall error rate was 7.2%. Extensive diverticulosis is an important factor limiting the sensitivity of barium enema examinations for the evaluation of sigmoid masses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gilbertsen VA: Proctosigmoidoscopy and polypectomy in reducing the incidence of rectal cancer.Cancer 34:936–939, 1974

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Williams CB, Hunt RH, Loose H, Riddle RH, Sakai Y, Swarbrick ET: Colonoscopy in the management of colonic polyps.Br J Surg 61:673–682, 1974

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Laufer I: The double-contrast enema: myths and misconceptions.Gastrointest Radiol 1:19–31, 1976

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ott DJ, Gelfand DW, Wu WC: Sensitivity of double contrast barium enema: emphasis on polyp detection.AJR 135:327–330, 1980

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Thoeni RF, Menuck L: Comparison of barium enema and colonoscopy in the detection of small colonic polyps.Radiology 124:631–635, 1977

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ott DJ, Gelfand DW, Ranquist NA: Cause of error in gastrointestinal radiology. II. Barium enema examination.Gastrointest Radiol 5:99–105, 1980

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kelvin FM, Gardiner R, Vas W, Stevenson GW: Colorectal carcinoma missed on double contrast barium enema study: a problem in perception.AJR 137:307–313, 1981

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Thoeni RF, Petras A: Detection of rectal and rectosigmoid lesions by double contrast barium enema examination and sigmoidoscopy.Radiology 142:59–62, 1982

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Brand EJ, Sullivan BH Jr, Sivak MV Jr, et al.: Colonoscopy in the diagnosis of unexplained rectal bleeding.Ann Surg 192:111–113, 1980

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Teague RH, Manning AP, Thornton JR, et al.: Colonoscopy for investigation of unexplained rectal bleeding.Lancet 1:1350–1351, 1978

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Parks TG: Post-mortem studies on the colon with special reference to diverticular disease.Proc R Soc Med 61:932–934, 1968

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hughes LE: Post-mortem survey of diverticular disease of the colon — Part I: diverticulosis and diverticulitis.Gut 10:336–344, 1969

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Painter NS, Burkitt DP: Diverticular disease of the colon: a deficiency disease of western civilization.Br Med J 2:450–454, 1971

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Parks TG: Natural history of diverticular disease of the colon. A review of 521 cases.Br Med J 4:639–645, 1969

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baker, S.R., Alterman, D.D. False-negative barium enema in patients with sigmoid cancer and coexistent diverticula. Gastrointest Radiol 10, 171–173 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01893095

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01893095

Key words

Navigation