PubMed1989
Biphasic contrast studies are generally advocated as the best current barium examination for the upper GI tract. Two recent prospective blinded trials compared the diagnostic results of a biphasic contrast examination--employing a medium-density barium suspension and glucagon--and endoscopy. Both methods appear to have nearly equal merit for the detection of peptic ulcer and gastric carcinoma. One of the trials demonstrated a relative inability of the barium examination to depict reflux esophagitis other than the severe variety, an inability that had been previously recognized. Earlier Japanese studies showed excellent results from biphasic studies in the detection of early and advanced gastric carcinoma. Because gastric carcinoma may present as a wide variety of lesions, ranging from minute alterations in mucosal relief through ulcers to masses, the values from these Japanese studies also test the sensitivity and specificity of the radiographic examination in demonstrating non-neoplastic lesions of the stomach. Ample data have shown that a radiographic examination compares favorably with endoscopy in the detection of esophageal carcinoma. The usefulness of a radiographic examination as a primary examination if disturbances of esophageal motor function are suspected is generally recognized. A state-of-the-art radiographic examination (ie, a biphasic examination, preferably with drug-induced hypotony) therefore appears to represent an appropriate initial examination in evaluation of most disorders of the upper GI tract. If this examination prompts the slightest suspicion of a malignant tumor, endoscopy should follow for the purpose of obtaining biopsy specimens. Endoscopy is not necessary if duodenal ulcers have been diagnosed by means of radiography; in typically benign gastric ulcers, radiographic follow-up without endoscopy may safely be considered. If in elderly patients multiple small gastric polyps have been detected, endoscopy is not needed. If complaints persist after negative results at radiographic examination, however, endoscopic intervention must be considered. If the complaints suggest reflux esophagitis, the clinician can choose between treatment and endoscopy. In a patient with acute upper GI bleeding, primary endoscopy may be preferred. This diagnostic approach in which endoscopy is employed as complementary to the barium examination is in most parts of the world a cost-effective one. It is also the safest possible option; although endoscopic complications are rare, their absolute number cannot be ignored if every patient had to undergo endoscopy. A biphasic approach with a medium-density barium suspension can be attempted in nearly every patient; if the patient proves unable to cooperate for an optimal double-contrast examination, a single-contrast examination can be performed with the same barium swallowed.