Clinical impact of multidetector computed tomography before double-balloon enteroscopy for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding

Table 1 Clinical features of patients (mean ± SD) n (%)

Item	Value
Sex (M/F)	13/18
Age (yr)	68.6 ± 11.3
Underlying diseases
Hypertension	23 (74.2)
DM	4 (12.9)
Chronic renal failure	5 (16.1)
Cirrhosis	2 (6.5)
Abdominal operation	1 (3.2)
NSAID/aspirin use	9 (29.0)
Hemoglobin level (g/dL)	7.95 ± 1.62
Hospital stay (d)	12.8 ± 10.8
Shock at presentation	14 (45.2)
Median time between DBE and MDCT (d)	2 (0-12)
Final diagnosis
Ulcers	7
Tumors	7
Angiodysplasia	2
Diverticulosis	10
Lymphangiectasia	1
Undiagnosed	2

DM: Design management; NSAID: Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs; DBE: Double-balloon endoscopy; MDCT: Multidetector computed tomography.

Table 2 Diagnostic yield of double-balloon endoscopy vs multidetector computed tomography according to final diagnosis n (%)

Final diagnosis	DBE positive	MDCT positive	Total
Ulcers	7	1	7
Tumors	7	6	7
Angiodysplasia	2	2	2
Diverticulosis	12	5	12
Lymphangiectasia	1	0	1
Undiagnosed	0	0	2
Diagnostic yield	29 (93.5)	14 (45.2)	31

DBE: Double-balloon endoscopy; MDCT: Multidetector computed tomography.

Table 3 Impact of multidetector computed tomography on choice of enteroscopy insertion route

	Route choice right	Route choice wrong
Positive CT	14	0
Negative CT	9	8
Pearson’s χ2 = 8.88, P = 0.003

CT: Computed tomography.