We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Abdominal computed tomography in refractory coeliac disease and enteropathy associated T-cell lymphoma.
World Journal of Gastroenterology : WJG 2007 March 22
AIM: To evaluate computed tomography (CT) findings, useful to suggest the presence of refractory celiac disease (RCD) and enteropathy associated T cell lymphoma (EATL).
METHODS: Coeliac disease (CD) patients were divided into two groups. Group I: uncomplicated CD (n = 14) and RCD type I (n = 10). Group II: RCD type II (n = 15) and EATL (n = 7).
RESULTS: Both groups showed classic signs of CD on CT. Intussusception was seen in 1 patient in group I vs 5 in group II (P = 0.06). Lymphadenopathy was seen in 5 patients in group II vs no patients in group I (P = 0.01). Increased number of small mesenteric vessels was noted in 20 patients in group I vs 11 in group II (P = 0.02). Eleven patients (50%) in group II had a splenic volume < 122 cm3 vs 4 in group I (14%), 10 patients in group I had a splenic volume > 196 cm3 (66.7%) vs 5 in group II (33.3%) P = 0.028.
CONCLUSION: CT scan is a useful tool in discriminating between CD and (Pre) EATL. RCD II and EATL showed more bowel wall thickening, lymphadenopathy and intussusception, less increase in number of small mesenteric vessels and a smaller splenic volume compared with CD and RCD I.
METHODS: Coeliac disease (CD) patients were divided into two groups. Group I: uncomplicated CD (n = 14) and RCD type I (n = 10). Group II: RCD type II (n = 15) and EATL (n = 7).
RESULTS: Both groups showed classic signs of CD on CT. Intussusception was seen in 1 patient in group I vs 5 in group II (P = 0.06). Lymphadenopathy was seen in 5 patients in group II vs no patients in group I (P = 0.01). Increased number of small mesenteric vessels was noted in 20 patients in group I vs 11 in group II (P = 0.02). Eleven patients (50%) in group II had a splenic volume < 122 cm3 vs 4 in group I (14%), 10 patients in group I had a splenic volume > 196 cm3 (66.7%) vs 5 in group II (33.3%) P = 0.028.
CONCLUSION: CT scan is a useful tool in discriminating between CD and (Pre) EATL. RCD II and EATL showed more bowel wall thickening, lymphadenopathy and intussusception, less increase in number of small mesenteric vessels and a smaller splenic volume compared with CD and RCD I.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app