CRIS

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://investigadores.udd.cl/handle/123456789/1

Browse

Settings

Access type: UnknownSubject: search.filters.subject.barium

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Publication,
    Imaging of intraluminal duodenal diverticulum in adults, an infrequent entity: pictorial essay
    (Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2024-12-02)
    WHITTLE PINTO, CAROLINA  
    ;
    Ignacio Maldonado
    ;
    Oscar Campos
    ;
    Franco Orellana
    <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec> <jats:title>Background</jats:title> <jats:p>An intraluminal duodenal diverticulum (IDD) is an infrequent abnormality consisting of a sac-like projection within the duodenum secondary to a congenital web of the membrane in the second portion of the duodenum near the papilla of Vater, due to incomplete lumen recanalization of the embryological foregut, with a typical imaging appearance of a “windsock.”</jats:p> <jats:p>The purpose is to present the radiological and tomographic findings characteristics of “IDD.”</jats:p> </jats:sec><jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>The IDD in barium upper gastrointestinal imaging and computed tomography (CT) was presented. On upper barium gastrointestinal examination, it is possible to detect an intraluminal duodenal image, that can be distended with gas or barium contrast and delimited by a thin wall (halo sign), mimicking a windsock or a double lumen. On CT, it is possible to identify a windsock sign on the duodenum, most often on the second part, distended by gas and contrast agent.</jats:p> </jats:sec><jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p>IDD imaging in barium upper gastrointestinal imaging and CT is pathognomonic of this infrequent entity in adults that needs to be recognized by the radiologist. In our small series, IDD images of the windsock sign on barium studies and the characteristic presentation on CT can help to exclude another duodenal conditions, guiding appropriate management.</jats:p> </jats:sec>
      1Scopus© Citations 1
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Publication,
    Are the Chicago 3.0 manometric diagnostics consistent with Chicago 4.0?
    (2023)
    Angélica Tobón
    ;
    Albis C Hani
    ;
    Cristiam D Pulgarin
    ;
    Andres F Ardila
    ;
    Oscar M Muñoz
    <jats:title>Summary</jats:title> <jats:p>There is little information on the degree of concordance between the results obtained using the Chicago 3.0 (CCv3.0) and Chicago 4.0 (CCv4.0) protocols to interpret high-resolution manometry (HRM) seeking to determine the value provided by the new swallowing maneuvers included in the last protocol. This is a study of diagnostic tests, evaluating concordance by consistency between the results obtained by the CCv3.0 and CCv4.0 protocols, in patients undergoing HRM. Concordance was assessed with the kappa test. Bland–Altman scatter plots, and Lin’s correlation-concordance coefficient (CCC) were used to assess the agreement between IRP measured with swallows in the supine and seated position or with solid swallows. One hundred thirty-two patients were included (65% women, age 53 ± 17 years). The most frequent HRM indication was dysphagia (46.1%). Type I was the most common type of gastroesophageal junction. The most frequent CCv4.0 diagnoses were normal esophageal motility (68.9%), achalasia (15.5%), and ineffective esophageal motility (IEM; 5.3%). The agreement between the results was substantial (Kappa 0.77 ± 0.05), with a total agreement of 87.9%. Diagnostic reclassification occurred in 12.1%, from IEM in CCv3.0 to normal esophageal motility in CCv4.0. Similarly, there was a high level of agreement between the IRP measured in the supine compared to the seated position (CCC0.92) and with solid swallows (CCC0.96). In conclusion, the CCv4.0 protocol presents a high concordance compared to CCv3.0. In the majority of manometric diagnoses there is no reclassification of patients with provocation tests. However, the more restrictive criteria of CCv4.0 achieve a better reclassification of patients with IEM.</jats:p>
      10Scopus© Citations 1
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Publication,
      8  1Scopus© Citations 48
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Publication,
    Esophageal motility disorders on high‐resolution manometry: Chicago classification version 4.0
    <sup>©</sup>
    (2020)
    Rena Yadlapati
    ;
    Peter J. Kahrilas
    ;
    Mark R. Fox
    ;
    Albert J. Bredenoord
    ;
    C. Prakash Gyawali
      1Scopus© Citations 828  1