Abstract
In an attempt to define the optimal interval of safety when a barium enema study of the colon follows a planned injury of the bowel by local treatment or biopsy (or both), we studied a group of 833 patients who were seen at the Mayo Clinic during 1978. In the study group, 886 polyps were destroyed by fulguration, 258 lesions were both sampled and fulgurated, and 126 areas were sampled for biopsy study. One hundred ninety-four patients had multiple lesions; in 193 of these, 2-18 diminutive polyps were fulgurated. Of the 846 barium studies in the 833 patients, 5 were done on the same day as the planned injury, 543 within 24 hours, and 174 within 72 hours. Four patients demonstrated extravasation of barium, but none had signs or symptoms of acute perforation nor did the resected surgical specimen demonstrate communication with site of injury.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Hemley SD, Kanick V: Perforation of the rectum; a complication of barium enema following rectal biopsy: report of 2 cases.Am J Dig Dis 8:882–884, 1963
Seaman WB, Wells J: Complications of the barium enema.Gastroenterology 48:728–737, 1965
Gorsch RV:Proctologic Anatomy ed 2. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1955
Jackman RJ, Beahrs OH: Treatment of polyps.Major Probl Clin Surg 8:63–78, 1968
Schrock T, Cerra F, Hawley PR, Hunt TK, Nichols RL, Samson RB: Symposium: wounds and wound healing.Dis Colon Rectum 25:1–15, 1982
Questions and Answers.JAMA 241:941–942, 1979
Harned RK, Consigny PM, Cooper NB, Williams SM, Woltjen AJ: Barium enema examination following biopsy of the rectum or colon.Radiology 145:11–16, 1982
Maglinte DDT, Strong RC, Strate RW, Caudill LD, Dyer PA, Chernish SM, Graffis RF: Barium enema after colorectal biopsies: experimental data.AJR 139:693–697, 1982
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Culp, C.E., Carlson, H.C. Is there a safe interval between diagnostic invasive procedure and the barium enema study of the colorectum?. Gastrointest Radiol 9, 69–72 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01887805
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01887805