Peritoneography: Normal and Pathologic Anatomy
Plain film identification of intraperitoneal structures is generally limited to those aspects outlined by contrasting extraperitoneal fat or naturally occurring intraluminal gas. The demonstration of abdominal masses by gastrointestinal series and barium enema examination requires mucosal alterations or bowel displacement. These routine contrast studies of the intestinal tract permit visualization of its internal mucosal contour alone. An outstanding limitation is the inability to accurately evaluate the thickness of the bowel wall. Only indirect signs must be relied upon for the radiologic diagnosis of mural or serosal disease. The classic radiologic differential diagnosis between mucosal, submucosal (intramural), and extrinsic lesions is a distinction made on indirect signs only, based upon the contours of a defect. Terminology includes such descriptions as “mural defect”, yet the actual wall of the structure studied is rarely visualized radiologically.
KeywordsUrinary Bladder Inguinal Hernia Gastrointestinal Series Visceral Surface Meglumine Diatrizoate
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 5.Ducharme JC, Bertrand R, Chacar R: Is it possible to diagnose inguinal hernia by x-ray? Preliminary report on herniography. J Can Ass Radiolo 18:448–451, 1967Google Scholar
- 8.Gelfand DW: Positive contrast peritoneography: Anatomy of normal abdomen. Med Radiol Photogr 45:30–39, 1969Google Scholar
- 10.Griscom NT, Harris GBC, Umansky I, et al: Internal radiographic anatomy of intrauterine fetus, Progress in Pediatric Radiology. Vol 2. Genitourinary Tract. Edited by HJ Kaufman. Yearbook Publishers Inc, Chicago, 1970, pp 344–371Google Scholar
- 13.Lindgren I, Nagy EJ, Virtama P: Drainage of radiographic contrast media from abdominal cavity: Experimental studies in rats. Acta Radiol Diagn 7:481–488, 1968Google Scholar
- 15.Margulis AR, Cook GB, Tucker GL, et al: Celiography with iothalamic acid: Experimental studies in dogs and rats. Am J Roentgenol Rad Ther Nucl Med 90:723–726, 1963Google Scholar
- 22.Meyers MA : Clinical report : A new view of the peritoneal cavity. Mod Med 44(6):51–56, 1976Google Scholar
- 23.O’Connor JF, Neuhauser EBD: Total body opacification in conventional and high dose urography in infancy. Am J Roentgenol Rad Ther Nucl Med 90:63–71, 1963Google Scholar
- 26.Rollino A: Studi sperimentali sulla peritoneografia. I. Valore della peritoneografia come mezzo di indagine. Minerva Chir (Torino) 11:230–234, 1956Google Scholar
- 28.Sternhill V, Schwartz S: Effect of Hypaque on mouse peritoneum. Radiology 75:811–814, I960Google Scholar
- 31.Wittman I: Peritoneoscopy. 2 volumes. Akadémiai Kiadô, Publishing House of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, 1966Google Scholar