Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010 Aug;51(2):155-9.
doi: 10.1097/MPG.0b013e3181cb4309.

Lack of utility of abdominal x-rays in the evaluation of children with constipation: comparison of different scoring methods

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Lack of utility of abdominal x-rays in the evaluation of children with constipation: comparison of different scoring methods

Licia Pensabene et al. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2010 Aug.

Abstract

Background and aim: Abdominal x-rays are used diagnostically in the evaluation of children with constipation. However, their clinical utility has not been established. The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy of different methods in identifying children with functional constipation (FC) or nonretentive fecal incontinence (NRFI).

Patients and methods: Retrospective review of abdominal x-rays in which colonic transit (CT), Barr, Leech, and fecal loading (FL) scores were blindly measured by blinded pediatric gastroenterologists and a radiologist. Children were classified a priori as FC or NRFI.

Results: One hundred sixty patients (125 FC, 35 NRFI) were studied. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) when comparing those with FC and those with NRFI: CT: 51 +/- 18 vs 40 +/- 21 hours; Barr: 14 +/- 5 vs 11 +/- 4; Leech: 10 +/- 2 vs 8 +/- 2; FL: 2 +/- 0.5 vs 1.7 +/- 0.4. More than 20% of FC had normal Barr and Leech scores, whereas >50% of NRFI had abnormal scores. CT discriminated better between FC and NRFI. There was a significant correlation (P < 0.05) between CT and Barr (0.45), Leech (0.41) and FL scores (0.36), and between Barr and Leech scores (r = 0.94). There was good intraobserver correlation between Barr, Leech, and FL scores but poor interobserver reproducibility.

Conclusions: Although significant differences in overall FC and NRFI scores exist, the discriminative value is low for all scores. There is poor interobserver reproducibility of the Barr, Leech, and FL scores. These findings confirm the limited value of the plain abdominal x-ray in the evaluation of children with constipation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparison among children with FC and those with NRFI. There were significant differences among different scores when comparing children with FC to those with NRFI * p < 0.05. FC; Functional constipation; NRFI.- Non retentive fecal inconitnence
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of scores in patients with functional constipation with or without fecal incontinence. Patients with constipation and fecal incontinence had significantly higher scores as compared with those with constipation alone. * p < 0.01
Figure 3
Figure 3
ROC curves for the different methods. There were no differences observed, and in all the area under the curve was similar.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Loening-Baucke V. Chronic constipation in children. Gastroenterology. 1993;105(5):1557–1564. - PubMed
    1. Partin JC, Hamill SK, Fischel JE, Partin JS. Painful defecation and fecal soiling in children. Pediatrics. 1992;89(6 Pt 1):1007–1009. - PubMed
    1. Loening-Baucke V. Prevalence, symptoms and outcome of constipation in infants and toddlers. J Pediatr. 2005;146(3):359–363. - PubMed
    1. Boccia G, Manguso F, Coccorullo P, Masi P, Pensabene L, Staiano A. Functional defecation disorders in children: PACCT criteria versus Rome II criteria. J Pediatr. 2007;151(4):394–398. 8 e1. - PubMed
    1. Rasquin-Weber A, Hyman PE, Cucchiara S, Fleisher DR, Hyams JS, Milla PJ, et al. Childhood functional gastrointestinal disorders. Gut. 1999;45 Suppl 2:II60–II68. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms