Diagnostic significance of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in patients with small bowel obstruction: a meta-analysis

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the diagnostic value of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in small bowel obstruction (SBO) patients.

Methods

Relevant literature was searched from the Cochrane Library, Pubmed and Embase. The extracted effective data was calculated using the Meta-Disc 1.4 software; statistical heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran’s Q test and I2.

Results

A total of five articles were selected for the meta-analysis. In addition, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), as well as the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 0.878 (95% CI 0.822–0.921), 0.807 (95% CI 0.753–0.854), 8.137 (95% CI 2.268–29.192), 0.127 (95% CI 0.040–0.4078) and 72.384 (95% CI 10.841–483.31), respectively. Furthermore, the AUC was 0.9648 with the Q of 0.9116.

Conclusions

The data suggest that MDCT is an effective method for diagnosis of SBO.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article.

References

  1. 1.

    Maung AA, Johnson DC, Piper GL, Barbosa RR, Rowell SE, Bokhari F, et al. Evaluation and management of small-bowel obstruction: an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guideline. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73:S362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Hayanga AJ, Bass-Wilkins K, Bulkley GB. Current management of small-bowel obstruction. Adv Surg. 2005;39:1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Hayden GE, Sprouse KL. Bowel obstruction and hernia. Emerg Med Clin N Am. 2011;29:319–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    O'Connor DB, Winter DC. The role of laparoscopy in the management of acute small-bowel obstruction: a review of over 2,000 cases. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech. 2012;26:12–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Kendrick ML. Partial small bowel obstruction: clinical issues and recent technical advances. Abdom Imaging. 2009;34:329–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Dayton MT, Dempsey DT, Larson GM, Posner AR. New paradigms in the treatment of small bowel obstruction—current problems in surgery. Curr Probl Surg. 2012;49:642–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Scott T, John B, John D, Santhi SV. Corrigendum: American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines: management of acute pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109:1400–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Suri S, Gupta S, Sudhakar PJ, Venkataramu NK, Sood B, Wig JD. Comparative evaluation of plain films, ultrasound and CT in the diagnosis of intestinal obstruction. Act Radiol. 1999;40:422.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Maglinte D, Gage S, Harmon B, Kelvin F, Hage J, Chua G, et al. Obstruction of the small intestine: accuracy and role of CT in diagnosis. Radiology. 1993;188:61–4.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Sinha R, Verma R. Multidetector row computed tomography in bowel obstruction Part 2 Large bowel obstruction. Clin Radiol. 2005;60:1068–75.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Chang WC, Ko KH, Lin CS, Hsu HH, Tsai SH, Fan HL, et al. Features on MDCT that predict surgery in patients with adhesive-related small bowel obstruction. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e89804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Idris M, Kashif N, Idris S, Memon WA, Tanveer UH, Haider Z. Accuracy of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography scan in detection of the point of transition of small bowel obstruction. Jpn J Radiol. 2012;30:235–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Hwang J, Lee J, Lee J. Value of multidetector CT in decision making regarding surgery in patients with small-bowel obstruction due to adhesion. Eur Radiol. 2009;19:2425–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Makar R, Bashir M, Haystead C, Iseman C, Mayes N, Hebert S, et al. Diagnostic performance of MDCT in identifying closed loop small bowel obstruction. Abdom Radiol (New York). 2016;41:1253–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Pongpornsup S, Tarachat K, Srisajjakul S. Accuracy of 64 sliced multi-detector computed tomography in diagnosis of small bowel obstruction. J Med Assoc Thai. 2009;92:1651–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Scrima A, Lubner MG, King S, Pankratz J, Kennedy G, Pickhardt PJ. Value of MDCT and clinical and laboratory data for predicting the need for surgical intervention in suspected small-bowel obstruction. Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208:785–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Filippone A, Cianci R, Grassedonio E, Fabio FD, Storto M. Four-section multidetector computed tomographic imaging of bowel obstruction: usefulness of axial and coronal plane combined reading. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2007;31:499–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Yaghmai V, Nikolaidis P, Hammond N, Petrovic B, Gore R, Miller F. Multidetector-row computed tomography diagnosis of small bowel obstruction: can coronal reformations replace axial images? Emerg Radiol. 2006;13:69–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Whiting P, Rutjes AWS, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PMM, Kleijnen J. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A. Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Taourel P, Kessler N, Lesnik A, Blayac P, Morcos L, Bruel J. Non-traumatic abdominal emergencies: imaging of acute intestinal obstruction. Eur Radiol. 2002;12:2151–60.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Savvas N, Brian K, Stephen H, Jenny S, Karim A. Imaging of acute small-bowel obstruction. Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185:1036–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Frank JP. Volume CT: state-of-the-art reporting. Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by The Social Development Fund of Nantong (Grant number MS32019013 and HS2019002); The Fifth Round of the “Programme 226” of Nantong (Grant number CPCNT ODMC 2017027); Young Medical Talents Fund of Nantong (Grant number WKZL2018017, QA2019007 and QA2019008); Jiangsu Provincial Key Medical Talents Program for Youth (Grant number QNRC2016404); and The Clinical Fund of Nantong University (Grant number 2019LZ002).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Conception and design of the research: BH; acquisition of data: FC, JZ2; analysis and interpretation of data: BH, MS; statistical analysis: JX, JY; obtaining funding: BH, JY, MS; drafting the manuscript: JZ1, RC; revision of manuscript for important intellectual content: JY, JS. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jushun Yang or Bosheng He.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 19 kb)

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhou, J., Cong, R., Shi, J. et al. Diagnostic significance of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in patients with small bowel obstruction: a meta-analysis. Jpn J Radiol 38, 458–462 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-020-00923-7

Download citation

Keyword

  • Multidetector computed tomography
  • Small bowel obstruction
  • Meta-analysis
  • Diagnosis