title: Quality of mucosal coating in double-contrast barium enema studies: comparison of two barium preparations.
abstract: To determine which of two types of barium preparation, a dry powder (AC-14, E-Z-EM, Montreal) or a premixed suspension (Liquid Polibar Plus, E-Z-EM), gives better mucosal coating for double-contrast enema studies, the authors compared the results of two series of 80 examinations each, one for each of the preparations. The films were retrospectively reviewed by two independent observers, who did not know which preparation had been used for a given examination. Mucosal coating was graded on a five-point scale and the amount of barium on a three-point scale. Each area of the colon--the cecum, the ascending, the transverse and the descending colon and the rectosigmoid--was rated separately. The premixed barium suspension yielded significantly better mucosal coating than the dry powder in all areas of the colon (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the two preparations in the amount of barium deposited in any region of the colon (p > 0.05) or in the proportion of unsatisfactory examinations (p > 0.05). The authors conclude that the premixed suspension yielded better-quality mucosal coating than a suspension made from the dry powder and resulted in a similar high proportion of technically satisfactory studies.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology, St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, BC.
authors.forename: H J
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: Bray
authors.forename: J R
authors.initials: JR
authors.lastname: Mathieson
mesh_terms: D001466:Barium Sulfate / Q000008:administration & dosage; D003106:Colon / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D004733:Enema; D006801:Humans; D011859:Radiography; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D014783:Viscosity
chemical_list: D001466:Barium Sulfate