Abdominal tuberculosis is an increasingly common disease that poses diagnostic challenge, as the nonspecific features of the disease which may lead to diagnostic delays and development of complications. This condition is regarded as a great mimicker of other abdominal pathology. A high index of suspicion is an important factor in early diagnosis. Abdominal involvement may occur in the gastrointestinal tract, peritoneum, lymphnodes or solid viscera. Various investigative methods have been used to aid in the diagnosis of abdominal tuberculosis. Early diagnosis and initiation of antituberculous therapy and surgical treatment are essential to prevent morbidity and mortality. Most of the patients respond very well to standard antitubercular therapy and surgery is required only in a minority of cases. Imaging plays an important role in diagnosis of abdominal tuberculosis because early recognition of this condition is important. We reviewed our experience with the findings on various imaging modalities for diagnosis of this potentially treatable disease.

Traumatic injury to the pancreas is rare and difficult to diagnose. In contrast, traumatic injuries to the liver, spleen and kidney are common and are usually identified with ease by imaging modalities. Pancreatic injuries are usually subtle to identify by different diagnostic imaging modalities, and these injuries are often overlooked in cases with extensive multiorgan trauma. The most evident findings of pancreatic injury are post-traumatic pancreatitis with blood, edema, and soft tissue infiltration of the anterior pararenal space. The alterations of post-traumatic pancreatitis may not be visualized within several hours following trauma as they are time dependent. Delayed diagnoses of traumatic pancreatic injuries are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Imaging plays an important role in diagnosis of pancreatic injuries because early recognition of the disruption of the main pancreatic duct is important. We reviewed our experience with the use of various imaging modalities for diagnosis of blunt pancreatic trauma.

Background and Aims: Validity of the lactulose breath test (LBT) to diagnose small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) has been questioned. Therefore, a study was planned to compare LBT with glucose breath test (GBT) to diagnose SIBO in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients and controls. Methods: 175 diarrhea-predominant IBS patients and 150 apparently healthy controls were enrolled. IBS was diagnosed according to Rome II criteria. Breath samples were collected every 10 min up to 180 min. Breath H₂ and CH₄ were measured using an SC MicroLyzer. SIBO was positive with a sustained increase in breath H₂ or CH₄ or both ≥10 ppm over a baseline value within <90 min in case of LBT and within <120 min in GBT. Results: SIBO was positive in 60/175 (34.3%) patients by lactulose and in 11/175 (6.2%) patients by GBT. In controls, LBT was positive for SIBO in 45/150 (30%) patients and in 1/150 (0.66%) patients by GBT. Positive LBT for SIBO was not significantly different in patients and controls; while using GBT, SIBO was significantly higher (p < 0.01) in patients as compared to controls. By using GBT as gold standard for SIBO, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of LBT in IBS patients was 63.6, 67.7, 11.7 and 96.6% respectively. Conclusion: LBT is not a good test to discriminate SIBO in IBS patients from controls.

No abstract