Variants and Pseudotumors Simulating Diseases in the Abdomen and Pelvis

  • A. Shirkhoda
Conference paper
Part of the Syllabus book series (SYLLABUS)


The quality of conventional radiography or sectional imaging of the abdomen and pelvis and the proper interpretation of images depend on numerous factors. For example, if gastrointestinal barium exam or abdominal CT are not done optimally and the radiologist is unfamiliar with the normal variance and pseudotumors, the interpretation can be inaccurate. In addition to observer’s error in recognition of normal variations, lack of clinical information such as prior abdominal surgery can be a major contributor to misdiagnosis which can lead to erroneous management. Following is a brief discussion of such problems provided under three categories.


Oral Contrast Radical Hysterectomy Left Renal Vein Oxidize Cellulose Prior Abdominal Surgery 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Suggested Reading

  1. Apter S, Hertz M, Rubinstein ZJ, Zissin R (1990) Gossypiboma in the early postoperative period: a diagnostic problem. Clin Radiol 42:128–129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakare SC, Shafir M, McElhinney AJ (1987) Exclusion of small bowel from pelvis for postoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer. J Surg Oncol 35:55–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Couanet D, Shirkhoda A, Wallace S (1984) Computed tomography after partial hepatectomy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 8:453–457PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Freed KS, Paulson EK, Frederick MG, Keogan MT, Pappas TN (1997) Abdomen after a Puestow procedure: postoperative CT appearance, complications, and potential pitfalls. Radiology 203(3):790–794PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Ginaldi S, Zornoza J (1980) Large duodenal diverticulum simulating pancreatic mass by computed tomography. Comput Tomogr 4:169–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hanbidge AE, Asch MR (1996) Misdiagnosis of renal cell carcinoma by computed tomography with angiography: a potential pitfall. Can Assoc Radiol J 47(1):30–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Ito K, Honjo K, Fujita T, Awaya H, Matsumoto T, Matsunaga N, Higuchi M, Kada T, Mattrey RF (1996) Liver neoplasms: diagnostic pitfalls in cross-sectional imaging. Radiographics 16(2):273–293PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Kopka L, Fischer U, Gross AJ, Funke M, Oestmann JW, Grabbe E (1996) CT of retained surgical sponges (textilomas): pitfalls in detection and evaluation. J Comput Assist Tomogr 20(6):919–923PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lee JKT, Stanley RJ, Sagel SS, et al. (1981) CT appearance of the pelvis after abdominoperineal resection for rectal carcinoma. Radiology 141:737PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Low RA, Kuni CC, Letourneau JG (1990) Pancreas transplant imaging: an overview. Am J Roentgenol 155:13–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McDermott WV Jr, Greenberger NJ, Isselbacher KJ, et al. (1963) Major hepatic resection: diagnostic techniques and metabolic problems. Surgery 54:56–66Google Scholar
  12. Pan G, Shirkhoda A (1987) Pelvic exenteration: role of CT in follow-up. Radiology 164:665–670PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Papanicolaou N, Harbury OL, Pfister RC (1988) Fat-filled postoperative renal cortical defects: sonographic and CT appearance. Am J Roentgenol 151:503–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Parker M, Bosscher J, Barnhill D, Park R (1993) Ovarian management during radical hysterectomy in the premenopausal patient. Obstet Gynecol 82:187–190PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Phil E, McDermott FT, Price AB (1981) Disease-free survival and recurrence after resection of rectal carcinoma. J Surg Oncol 152:131–136Google Scholar
  16. Shirkhoda A (1991) Diagnostic pitfalls in abdominal CT. Radiographics 11:969–1002PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Shirkhoda A (1995) Diagnostic pitfalls in abdominal CT relevant to percutaneous interventions. Semin Intervent Radiol 12:146–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Young ST, Paulson EK, McCann RL, et al. (1993) Appearance of oxidized cellulose (surgical) on post-operative CT scans: similaritv to postoperative abscess. Am J Roentgenol 160:275–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Shirkhoda
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Diagnostic ImagingWilliam Beaumont HospitalRoyal OakUSA

Personalised recommendations