Gastrointestinal Radiology

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 81–84 | Cite as

Impact of the barium enema on patient management

  • Yu Men Chen
  • David J. Ott
  • David W. Gelfand
  • H. Alexander Munitz


The medical records of 214 consecutive inpatients who had a barium enema examination were reviewed, and the clinical indications, efficacy of the barium enema, and patient outcome were correlated to determine the impact of the barium enema on patient management. The most frequent indications were rectal bleeding (33%), abdominal pain (31%), anemia (17%), weight loss (12%), and previous lesions needing reevaluation (12%). Diverticular disease (30%), colonic polyps (10%), and primary or secondary malignancies (12%) were the most common abnormalities detected radiographically. The sensitivity of the barium enema for colonic neoplasms was 89%, with only 1 small cecal polyp being undetected. The effects of barium enema on patient management were serious pathology excluded (64%), diagnosis made that changed therapy (24%), existing therapy continued (10%), and a further study ordered (2%). No serious or life-threatening lesion was missed by barium enema.

Key words

Colon, radiography Barium enema, indications 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Thoeni RF, Venbrux AC: The value of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium-enema examinations in the evaluation of patients with subacute and chronic lower intestinal bleeding.Radiology 146:603–607, 1983PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tedesco FJ, Waye JD, Raskin JB, Morris SJ, Greenwald RA: Colonoscopic evaluation of rectal bleeding. A study of 304 patients.Ann Intern Med 89:907–909, 1978PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Todd GJ, Forde KA: Lower gastrointestinal bleeding with negative or inconclusive radiographic studies: the role of colonoscopy.Am J Surg 138:627–628, 1979PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brekkan A, Kjartansson O, Tulinius H, Sigvaldason H: Diagnostic sensitivity of x-ray examination of the large bowel in colorectal cancer.Gastrointest Radiol 8:363–365, 1983PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johnson CD, Carlson HC, Taylor WF, Weiland LP: Barium enemas of carcinoma of the colon: sensitivity of double- and single-contrast studies.AJR 140:1143–1149, 1983PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beart RW Jr, Metzger PP, O'Connell MJ, Schutt AJ: Post-operative screening of patients with carcinoma of the colon.Dis Colon Rectum 24:585–588, 1981PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brady PG, Frank BA, Zeabart LE: The role of colonoscopic evaluation following partial colon resection for adenocarcinoma.J Fla Med Assoc 71:155–157, 1984PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaude JV, Harty RF: Sensitivity of single contrast barium enema with regard to colorectal disease as diagnosed by colonoscopy.Eur J Radiol 2:290–292, 1982PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ott DJ, Chen YM, Gelfand DW, Wu WC, Munitz HA: Single-contrast vs double-contrast barium enema in the detection of colonic polyps.AJR 146:993–996, 1986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ott DJ, Gelfand DW, Chen YM, Munitz HA: Colonoscopy and the barium enema: a radiologic viewpoint.South Med J 78:1033–1035, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yu Men Chen
    • 1
  • David J. Ott
    • 1
  • David W. Gelfand
    • 1
  • H. Alexander Munitz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology, Bowman Gray School of MedicineWake Forest UniversityWinston-SalemUSA

Personalised recommendations