DIAGNOSTIC-IMAGING OF MESENTERIC INFARCTION

PURPOSE: To determine the value of diagnostic imaging in the managemen t of mesenteric infarction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within 8 years, 54 patients with mesenteric infarction underwent diagnostic imaging befor e surgery, including plain radiography (n = 45), ultrasound (US) (n = 29), small bowel follow-through examination (n = 7), colon enema study (n = 7), angiography (n = 16), and computed tomography (CT) (n = 22). Clinical course, laboratory values, and imaging findings were conside red in diagnosis. RESULTS: Radiography and US allowed correct diagnose s in five of 18 cases (28%). Only one of 14 fluoroscopic examinations contributed to diagnosis. Fourteen of 16 angiography studies (sensitiv ity, 87.5%) and 18 of 22 CT examinations (82%) were correct. The diffe rence in sensitivity between CT and angiography was not significant (P > .05). CONCLUSION: CT and angiography are highly sensitive, but CT c an also be used to rule out other causes of acute abdomen. Careful eva luation of patient history and clinical situation should lead to suspi cion of mesenteric ischemia and early indication for CT.