MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is quantitative research with a true experimental approach. Actual bleeding volume was simulated by an acrylic phantom containing Iodine contrast media (5 ml, 10 ml, 15 ml, and 20 ml). The phantom was scanned using routine CT protocol using the helical and sequence technique. Bleeding volume from each technique was measured manually using the Broderick formula and automatic software (ROI based). Accuracy was assessed by comparing the volume measurement result to the actual bleeding volume. Data was analysed using the Friedman test and by Wilcoxon.
RESULTS: The standard deviation of measured bleeding volume from the manual and automatic measurements compared to the actual bleeding volume were (0.220; 0.236; 0.351; 0.057) and (0.139; 0.270; 0.315; 0.329) in helical technique, and (0.333; 0.376; 0.447; 0.476) and (0.139; 0.242; 0.288; 0,376) in sequence technique. There are differences in the measurement results from the helical and sequence techniques (p <0.05) and using manual and automatic methods (p <0.05).
CONCLUSION: The measurement of bleeding volume that has a standard deviation value compared to the actual volume is more accurate in the helical technique using the automatic method, while the sequence technique is the manual method.
METHODS: The clinical data and scintigraphic findings of consecutive patients referred to the Department of Nuclear Medicine, HKL for GES from July 2020 to December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed.
RESULTS: Thirteen patients underwent the study (6 males and 7 females) with a mean age of 47.9 years (age range of 25 to 72 years). The majority of patients (n=11) were diagnosed with either type I or type II diabetes mellitus. Ten patients reported abnormal scan findings with only 3 patients had normal GES findings. Scintigraphic findings from our patients, association of symptoms with abnormal GES as well as the challenges in implementing GES in Malaysia is discussed.
CONCLUSION: GES provides valuable information to the referring physician in the diagnosis and management of patients with gastric motility disorders. However, its use is limited because of limited availability, cost restriction, lack of familiarity among clinicians, and lack of understanding of the test. Further effort is thus needed to enhance the availability and usage of GES in Malaysia.