ASSESSMENT AND COMPARISON OF ABDOMINAL MASSES BY SONOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY

OBJECTIVES:To study the role of ultrasonography and computed tomography in the evaluation of abdominal masses, to compare their diagnostic accuracies, to evaluate the imaging features of lesions and to know the exact site of origin and extension into surrounding structures.MATERIALS AND METHODS:A prospective study of 104 patients with abdominal masses.USG was done with Toshiba SSA and Philips Envisor C machine and CT-Scan examination was performed in all patients on Philips brilliance 6-slice whole body CT scanner.RESULTS: There were 35(30.62%)cases of hepatobilliary masses, renal15(14.40%)cases,pancreatic 7(6.72%)cases, 5(4.80%) cases of splenic masses and 30(28.82%)cases of pelvic masses.8cases with other abdominal masses.Hepatic SOL were detected in 6(5.76%) and 8(7.69%), 5(4.80%)cases of gall bladder masses and 4(3.85%),Omental caking was seen in 2(1.92%) cases and 4(3.85%), calcification was seen in 2(1.92%) cases and 4(3.85%) cases, renal calculi were seen in 4(3.84%) cases and6(5.77%)cases, on sonography and CT examination.Peritoneal deposits were seen in 3(2.88%) cases of ovarian carcinoma and unknown malignancy on US and in 5(4.88%) cases on CT.Ascites and lymphadenopathy was more accurately detected on CT as compared to US.CT detected splenicinfarcts which were missed on ultrasonography.CONCLUSION: CT is more sensitive in evaluation of site and size of lesion, detection of calcification, adjacent organ infiltration and regional lymphadenopathy.The limitations of CT are ionizing radiation, high cost and contrast administration.Hence ultrasound should be the primary screening modality and CT should be used for further characterizing the masses.