The impact of body mass index on concordance in the interpretation of matched noncontrast and contrast abdominal pelvic computed tomographic scans in ED patients with nontraumatic abdominal pain

American Journal of Emergency Medicine

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 144-148

  Wolfe, Jeanette M ^a,b   Smithline, Howard ^a   Lee, Steven ^a   Coughlin, Brett ^a   Polino, Joseph ^a   Blank, Fidela ^a  

^a TUFTS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b Pediatric Surgery   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ABDOMINAL PAIN; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BODY HEIGHT; BODY MASS; BODY WEIGHT; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; WAIST CIRCUMFERENCE;

ABDOMINAL PAIN; ADIPOSE TISSUE; BODY COMPOSITION; BODY MASS INDEX; CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; CONTRAST MEDIA; EMERGENCY SERVICE, HOSPITAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RADIOGRAPHY, ABDOMINAL; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 33144480863     PISSN: 07356757     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2005.08.015     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. L. Huynh, B. Couglin, and J. Wolfe Patient encounter time intervals in the evaluation of emergency department patients requiring abdominopelvic CT: oral contrast versus no contrast Emerg Radiol 10 2004 310 313
2. J. Peck, A. Peck, and C. Peck The clinical role of noncontrast helical computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis Am J Surg 180 2 2000 133 136
3. M. Horton, S. Counter, and M. Florence A prospective trial of computed tomography and ultrasonography for diagnosing appendicitis in the atypical patient Am J Surg 179 5 2000 370 381
4. S. Raman, D. Lu, and B. Kadell Accuracy of nonfocused helical CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a 5-year review AJR Am J Roentgenol 178 2002 1319 1325
5. E. Wilson, C. Cole, and M. Nipper Computed tomography and ultrasonography in the diagnosis of appendicitis: when are they indicated? Arch Surg 136 6 2001 670 675
6. J. Seidell, and A. Rissanen Time trends in the worldwide prevalence of obesity G. Bray C. Bouchard W. James Handbook of obesity 1998 Marcel Dekker New York 79 91
7. WHO Expert Committee. Physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry. WHO Technical Report Series no. 854. Geneva: WHO, 1995. WHO: National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation, and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in Adults.
8. J.C. Seidell, A. Oosterlee, and M. Thijssen Assessment of intra-abdominal and subcutaneous abdominal fat: relation between anthropometry and computed tomography Am J Clin Nutr 45 1987 7 13
9. J. Kobayashi, N. Tadokoro, and M. Watanabe A novel method of measuring intra-abdominal fat volume using helical computed tomography Int J Obes 26 2002 398 402
10. R. Ross, L. Leger, and D. Morris Quantification of adipose tissue by MRI: relationship with anthropometric variables J Appl Physiol 72 1992 787 795
11. Lee S, Coughlin B, Wolfe J, et al. Prospective comparison of helical CT of abdomen and pelvis without and with oral contrast in assessing acute abdominal pain adult emergency patients unpublished data.
12. S. Basak, R. Nazarian, and L. Wechsler Is unenhanced CT sufficient for evaluation of acute abdominal pain? J Clin Imaging 26 2002 405 407