Search

Objective: The study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in identifying small bowel obstruction (SBO) and to investigate the impact of clinician experience level and body mass index (BMI) on POCUS performance for diagnosing SBO in the Emergency Department., Methods: We systematically searched PubMed and Cochrane databases from January 2011-2022. We performed a meta-analysis using individual patient-level data from prospective diagnostic accuracy studies from which we obtained data from the corresponding authors. Overall test characteristics and subgroup analysis across clinician experience levels and a range of BMI were calculated. The primary outcome was SBO as the final diagnosis during hospitalization., Results: We included Individual patient data from 433 patients from 5 prospective studies. Overall, 33% of patients had a final diagnosis of SBO. POCUS had 83.0% (95%CI 71.7%-90.4%) sensitivity and 93.0% (95%CI 55.3%-99.3%) specificity; LR+ was 11.9 (95%CI 1.2-114.9) and LR- was 0.2 (95%CI 0.1-0.3). Residents had exhibited a sensitivity of 73.0% (95%CI 56.6%-84.9%) and specificity of 88.2% (95%CI 58.8%-97.5%), whereas attendings had demonstrated a sensitivity of 87.7% (95%CI 71.1%-95.4%) and specificity of 91.4% (95%CI 57.4%-98.8%). Among those patients with BMI<30 kg/m 2 , POCUS showed a sensitivity of 88.6% (95%CI 79.5%-94.7%) and a specificity of 84.0% (95%CI 75.3%-90.6%), while patients with BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 exhibited a sensitivity of 72.0% (95%CI 50.6%-87.9%) and specificity of 89.5% (95%CI 75.2%-97.1%)., Conclusions: POCUS correctly identified those patients with SBO with high sensitivity and specificity. Diagnostic accuracy was slightly reduced when performed by resident physicians and among patients with a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 ., Registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022303598., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the predictive value of various signs and symptoms for small bowel obstruction (SBO) in patients with prior abdominal surgery., Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a previously reported prospective study of ultrasonography for SBO. Patients with prior abdominal surgery were identified and presenting signs and symptoms were compared to the CT diagnosis of SBO., Results: No signs or symptoms were predictive of SBO., Conclusion: No constellation of signs and symptoms can be used to reliably exclude a SBO in patients with prior abdominal surgery.

Background: Plain film radiography (x-ray) is often the initial study in patients with suspected small bowel obstruction (SBO) to expedite patient care., Objective: To compare bedside ultrasonography (US) and x-ray for the detection of SBO., Methods: This was a prospective study using a convenience sample of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with abdominal pain, vomiting, or other symptoms suggestive of a SBO. Patients were evaluated with US prior to x-ray and CT. US was performed by emergency physicians (EPs) who completed a 10 min training module and five prior US exams for SBO. The criterion standard for the diagnosis of SBO was the results of CT read by board-certified radiologists., Results: In all, 76 patients were enrolled and evaluated with US for SBO. A total of 33 (43%) were diagnosed as having SBO. Dilated bowel on US had a sensitivity of 91% (95% CI 75 to 98%) and specificity of 84% (95% CI 69 to 93%) for SBO, compared to 27% (95% CI 14 to 46%) and 98% (95% CI 86 to 100%) for decreased bowel peristalsis on US. X-ray had a sensitivity of 46.2% (95% CI 20.4 to 73.9%) and specificity of 66.7% (95% CI 48.9 to 80.9%) for SBO when diagnostic, but was non-diagnostic 36% of the time., Conclusion: EP-performed US compares favourably to x-ray in the diagnosis of SBO.