Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Radiographic stool quantification: an equivalence study of 484 symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects

  • Hollow Organ GI
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To determine if symptomatic patients referred for radiographic stool quantification have equivalent stool burden to asymptomatic patients.

Method

This was an IRB-approved HIPAA-compliant retrospective equivalence cohort study. An a priori equivalence power calculation was performed. Consecutive abdominal radiographs performed in adult outpatients with bloating, constipation, diarrhea, or abdominal pain to assess “fecal loading” [n = 242 (fecal cohort)] were compared to those performed in asymptomatic adult outpatients to assess “renal stones” [n = 242 (renal cohort)]. Radiographs were randomized and reviewed by two blinded independent abdominal radiologists. Exclusion criteria, designed to avoid unblinding, included urinary tract calculi ≥ 0.5 cm, multiple urinary tract calculi, and ureteral stent(s). Readers scored all radiographs (n = 484) for stool burden using validated Leech criteria [scale: 0 (none) to 15 (extreme diffuse)]. Mean Leech scores and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Multivariable generalized linear modeling was performed to adjust for baseline medication use, age, and gender. The adjusted parameter estimate was used to test for equivalence in the mean difference between cohorts using Schuirmann’s method of two one-sided t-tests. Inter-reader agreement was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients.

Results

Overall mean Leech scores for fecal [6.9 (95% CI 6.7, 7.2)] and renal [7.3 (95% CI 7.1, 7.5)] cohorts were equivalent within a margin of 0.75 (adjusted mean difference: − 0.4 [90% CI − 0.7, − 0.04]; p value = 0.02). Inter-reader agreement was good [ICC: 0.62 (95% CI 0.56, 0.68)].

Conclusion

Radiographic stool quantification produces equivalent results in symptomatic and asymptomatic adults and is of uncertain value.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lacy BE, Levenick JM, Crowell M (2012) Chronic constipation: new diagnostic and treatment approaches. Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology 5 (4):233-247. https://doi.org/10.1177/1756283x12443093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Vazquez Roque M, Bouras EP (2015) Epidemiology and management of chronic constipation in elderly patients. Clinical interventions in aging 10:919-930. https://doi.org/10.2147/cia.s54304

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Higgins PD, Johanson JF (2004) Epidemiology of constipation in North America: a systematic review. The American journal of gastroenterology 99 (4):750-759. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.04114.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lacy BE, Mearin F, Chang L, Chey WD, Lembo AJ, Simren M, Spiller R (2016) Bowel Disorders. Gastroenterology 150 (6):1393-1407.e1395. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2016.02.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Simren M, Palsson OS, Whitehead WE (2017) Update on Rome IV Criteria for Colorectal Disorders: Implications for Clinical Practice. Current gastroenterology reports 19 (4):15-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-017-0554-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. National Collaborating Centre for Ws, Children’s H (2010) National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Guidance. In: Constipation in Children and Young People: Diagnosis and Management of Idiopathic Childhood Constipation in Primary and Secondary Care. RCOG Press. National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health., London

  7. Cowlam S, Vinayagam R, Khan U, Marsden S, Minty I, Moncur P, Bain I, Yiannakou YJ (2008) Blinded comparison of faecal loading on plain radiography versus radio-opaque marker transit studies in the assessment of constipation. Clinical radiology 63 (12):1326-1331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2008.06.011

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Reber J, McGauvran A, Froemming A (2018) Abdominal radiograph usage trends in the setting of constipation: a 10-year experience. Abdominal radiology (New York) 43 (9):2231-2238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1466-7

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Reuchlin-Vroklage LM, Bierma-Zeinstra S, Benninga MA, Berger MY (2005) Diagnostic value of abdominal radiography in constipated children: a systematic review. Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine 159 (7):671-678. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.159.7.671

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hanauer DA, Mei Q, Law J, Khanna R, Zheng K (2015) Supporting information retrieval from electronic health records. J of Biomedical Informatics 55 (C):290-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2015.05.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. The Big List of Narcotic Drugs. (2018) American Addiction Centers. https://americanaddictioncenters.org/the-big-list-of-narcotic-drugs/. Accessed October 23 2018

  12. Medical Imaging Resource Community (MIRC). (2018) Radiological Society of North America. http://mirc.rsna.org/query. Accessed 10/23/18 2018

  13. Leech SC, McHugh K, Sullivan PB (1999) Evaluation of a method of assessing faecal loading on plain abdominal radiographs in children. Pediatric radiology 29 (4):255-258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002470050583

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. van den Bosch M, Graafmans D, Nievelstein R, Beek E (2006) Systematic assessment of constipation on plain abdominal radiographs in children. Pediatric radiology 36 (3):224-226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-005-0065-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rezazadeh A, Javaherizadeh H, Chahardahcherik F, Yavarahmadi MH, Sadjadei N, Tahmasebi M (2016) Reliability of Barr, Leech, and Blethyn score in using of plain radiography in determining fecal impaction in children with and without constipation. Arquivos de gastroenterologia 53 (3):141-145. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0004-28032016000300004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. de Lorijn F, van Rijn RR, Heijmans J, Reitsma JB, Voskuijl WP, Henneman OD, Taminiau JA, Benninga MA (2006) The Leech method for diagnosing constipation: intra- and interobserver variability and accuracy. Pediatric radiology 36 (1):43-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-005-0031-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Schuirmann DJ (1987) A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. Journal of pharmacokinetics and biopharmaceutics 15 (6):657-680

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Shankar PR, Kaza RK, Al-Hawary MM, Masch WR, Curci NE, Mendiratta-Lala M, Sakala MD, Johnson TD, Davenport MS (2018) Impact of Clinical History on Maximum PI-RADS Version 2 Score: A Six-Reader 120-Case Sham History Retrospective Evaluation. Radiology 288 (1):158-163. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018172619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Landers R (2015) Computing Intraclass Correlations (ICC) as Estimates of Interrater Reliability in SPSS. The Winnower . https://doi.org/10.15200/winn.143518.81744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological bulletin 86 (2):420-428.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cicchetti D (1994) Guidelines, Criteria, and Rules of Thumb for Evaluating Normed and Standardized Assessment Instrument in Psychology, vol 6. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Unfunded study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Michigan Medicine, 1500 E. Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Omar Khan, Prasad R. Shankar, Richard H. Cohan & Matthew S. Davenport

  2. Michigan Radiology Quality Collaborative, Michigan Medicine, 1500 E. Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Omar Khan, Prasad R. Shankar & Matthew S. Davenport

  3. University of Michigan Medical School, 1500 E. Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Adish D. Parikh

  4. Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR), University of Michigan, 1600 Huron Parkway, Building 400, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA

    Nahid Keshavarzi & Shokoufeh Khalatbari

  5. Department of Gastroenterology, Michigan Medicine, 1500 E. Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Richard J. Saad

  6. Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, 1500 E. Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Matthew S. Davenport

  7. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Drive, B1 D530H, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Prasad R. Shankar

Authors
  1. Omar Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prasad R. Shankar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adish D. Parikh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Richard H. Cohan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nahid Keshavarzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Shokoufeh Khalatbari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Richard J. Saad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Matthew S. Davenport
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Prasad R. Shankar.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 11 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (DOC 87 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khan, O., Shankar, P.R., Parikh, A.D. et al. Radiographic stool quantification: an equivalence study of 484 symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects. Abdom Radiol 44, 821–827 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1869-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1869-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation