SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Düzce Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 15 Issue: 2

Computed Tomography Findings in Patients Admitted to the Emergency Service with Acute Abdominal Pain

Akut Karın Ağrısı Nedeniyle Acil Servise Başvuran Hastaların Bilgisayarlı Tomografi Bulgularının Değerlendirilmesi

Mehmet Fatih İnci(Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Acil Tıp AD, Kahramanmaraş.)
Mehmet Okumuş(Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Genel Cerrahi AD Kahramanmaraş.)
Mürvet Yüksel(Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Radyoloji AD, Kahramanmaraş.)
Eyüp Mehmet Pircanoğlu(Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Genel Cerrahi AD Kahramanmaraş.)
Selim Bozkurt(Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Acil Tıp AD, Kahramanmaraş.)
Mehmet Sait Menzilcioğlu(Kahramanmaraş Necip Fazıl Şehir Hastanesi, Radyoloji Bölümü, Kahramanmaraş.)
Fuat Özkan(Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Radyoloji AD, Kahramanmaraş.)
Pages
—
Publication Date
2013-07-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Because there is no pathological CT finding in one-third of the patients,diagnostic algorithm must be followed and CT examination should be performed withappropriate techniques, protocols and optimization of dose

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the results of CT findings in patientsadmitted to the emergency service with acute abdominal pain.Methods: In last one year, 270 patients who admitted to our hospital’s emergency servicewith acute abdominal pain were included.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Patients had penetrating or blunt abdominal injury were excluded.Results: 270 patients with acute abdomen (129 men and 141 women, 18-93 years-old) wereanalyzed retrospectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Because there is no pathological CT finding in one-third of the patients,diagnostic algorithm must be followed and CT examination should be performed withappropriate techniques, protocols and optimization of dose
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Acute abdominal pain · computed Tomography · emergency

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the results of CT findings in patientsadmitted to the emergency service with acute abdominal pain.Methods: In last one year, 270 patients who admitted to our hospital’s emergency servicewith acute abdominal pain were included. Clinical datas and CT images were interpretedretrospectively. Patients had penetrating or blunt abdominal injury were excluded.Results: 270 patients with acute abdomen (129 men and 141 women, 18-93 years-old) wereanalyzed retrospectively. In 81 patients (30%) no abnormal finding was found. The mostcommon pathologic finding was urolithiasis in 54 patients (20%).Conclusion: CT is a fast, effective and reliable diagnostic method to clear up the cause ofacute abdominal pain. Because there is no pathological CT finding in one-third of the patients,diagnostic algorithm must be followed and CT examination should be performed withappropriate techniques, protocols and optimization of dose

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı akut karın ağrısı ile acil servise başvuran hastaların tanıaşamasında kullanılan abdominal bilgisayarlı tomografi (BT) bulgularını değerlendirmektir.Yöntem: Son bir yıl içerisinde hastanemiz acil servisine akut karın ağrısı ile başvurup tanıaşamasında abdominal bilgisayarlı tomografi çekilen 270 hastanın klinik bilgileri ve BTgörüntüleri geriye dönük olarak incelendi. Penetran ve künt yaralanmalı hastalar çalışma dışıbırakıldı.Bulgular: Çalışmaya akut karın ağrısı olan 270 hasta (129 erkek ve 141 kadın, 18-93 yaşaralığı) dahil edildi. Hastaların 81’inde (%30) ağrıyı açıklayacak bir patoloji saptanmadı.BT’de en sık görülen patoloji 54 hastada (%20) ürolitiyazis idi. En sık görülen gastrointestinalpatoloji intestinal obtrüksiyondu (%10).Sonuç: BT akut abdominal ağrı ile başvuran hastaların değerlendirilmesinde hızlı ve etkili birgörüntüleme yöntemidir. Hastaların üçte birinin gözlem altında ağrıları kendiliğinden geçennonspesifik karın ağrılı hastalar olması nedeniyle tanı algoritmasına uyulması ve gereklihallerde uygun teknik, protokollerin uygulanmasıyla ve doz optimizasyonu sağlanarak BTincelemenin yapılması gerekir

🔖

Cite This Article

İnci, M. F., Okumuş, M., Yüksel, M., Pircanoğlu, E. M., Bozkurt, S., Menzilcioğlu, M. S., Özkan, F. (2013). Computed Tomography Findings in Patients Admitted to the Emergency Service with Acute Abdominal Pain. Düzce Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, Volume: 15 Issue: 2. https://ajindex.com/articles/1346870

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Urban BA, Fishman EK. Tailored helical ct evaluation of acute abdomen. Radiographics: a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America. 2000;20:725-749.
  2. Mills AM, Baumann BM, Chen EH, Zhang KY, Glaspey LJ, Hollander JE et al. The impact of crowding on time until abdominal ct interpretation in emergency department patients with acute abdominal pain. Postgraduate medicine. 2010;122:75-81.
  3. Ahn SH, Mayo-Smith WW, Murphy BL, Reinert SE, Cronan JJ. Acute nontraumatic abdominal pain in adult patients: Abdominal radiography compared with ct evaluation. Radiology. 2002;225:159-164.
  4. Graff LGt, Robinson D. Abdominal pain and emergency department evaluation. Emergency medicine clinics of North America. 2001;19:123-136.
  5. Crawley MT, Booth A, Wainwright A. A practical approach to the first iteration in the optimization of radiation dose and image quality in ct: Estimates of the collective dose savings achieved. The British journal of radiology. 2001;74:607-614.
  6. Karabulut N, Ariyurek M. Low dose ct: Practices and strategies of radiologists in university hospitals. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2006;12:3-8.
  7. Heneghan JP, McGuire KA, Leder RA, DeLong DM, Yoshizumi T, Nelson RC. Helical ct for nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis: Comparison of conventional and reduced radiation-dose techniques. Radiology. 2003;229:575-580.
  8. Lund L, Larsen UL, Anderson E, Mikkelsen NT, Holt G. The outcome of computed tomography in patients with acute renal colic from a low-volume hospital. International urology and nephrology. 2008;40:255-258.
  9. Silva AC, Pimenta M, Guimaraes LS. Small bowel obstruction: What to look for. Radiographics: a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America. 2009;29:423-439. 10.
  10. Selcuk D, Kantarci F, Ogut G, Korman U. Radiological
  11. evaluation of internal abdominal hernias. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2005;16:57-64.
  12. Urban BA, Fishman EK. Tailored helical ct evaluation of acute abdomen. Radiographics: a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America. 2000;20:725-749.
  13. Silva AC, Pimenta M, Guimaraes LS. Small bowel obstruction: What to look for. Radiographics: a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America. 2009;29:423-439. 10.