Combined PET/CT colonography: Is this the way forward?

Gut

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 10-12

  Schreyer, A G ^a   Kikinis, R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL REGENSBURG   (Germany)

^b BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER STAGING; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HUMAN; NOTE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; WHOLE BODY TOMOGRAPHY;

COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; NEOPLASM STAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 29244434566     PISSN: 00175749     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/gut.2005.070870     Document Type: Note

References (30)

1. Pescatore P, Glucker T, Delarive J, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement of CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). Gut 2000;47:126-30.
2. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2191-200.
3. van Gelder RE, Florie J, Stoker J. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance with CT colonography: current controversies and obstacles. Abdom Imaging 2005;30:5-12.
4. Pickhardt PJ. By-patient performance characteristics of CT colonography: importance of polyp size threshold data. Radiology 2003;229:291-3.
5. Spinzi G, Belloni G, Martegani A, et al. Computed tomographic colonography and conventional colonoscopy for colon diseases: a prospective, blinded study. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:394-400.
6. Ajaj W, Pelster G, Treichel U, et al. Dark lumen magnetic resonance colonography: comparison with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal pathology. Gut 2003;52:1738-43.
7. Rockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwiecki D, et al. Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet 2005;365:305-11.
8. Hara AK, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, et al. CT colonography: single- versus multi-detector row imaging. Radiology 2001;219:461-5.
9. Pickhardt PJ. Three-dimensional endoluminal CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): comparison of three commercially available systems. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:1599-606.
10. Ajaj W, Lauenstein TC, Pelster G, et al. MR colonography in patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 2005;234:452-9.
11. Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Clarke PD, et al. Colorectal neoplasm detection using virtual colonoscopy: a feasibility study. Gut 1998;43:806-11.
12. Rohren EM, Turkington TG, Coleman RE. Clinical applications of PET in oncology. Radiology 2004;231:305-32.
13. Abdel-Nabi H, Doerr RJ, Lamonica DM, et al. Staging of primary colorectal carcinomas with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose whole-body PET: correlation with histopathologic and CT findings. Radiology 1998;206:755-60.
14. Huebner RH, Park KC, Shepherd JE, et al. A meta-analysis of the literature for whole-body FDG PET detection of recurrent colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1177-89.
15. Lemke AJ, Niehues SM, Hosten N, et al. Retrospective digital image fusion of multidetector CT and 18F-FDG PET: clinical value in pancreatic lesions-a prospective study with 104 patients. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1279-86.
16. Schoder H, Yeung HW, Gonen M, et al. Head and neck cancer: clinical usefulness and accuracy of PET/CT image fusion. Radiology 2004;231:65-72.
17. Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS, et al. Whole-body dual-modality PET/CT and whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology. JAMA 2003;290:3199-206.
18. Beyer T, Antoch G, Blodgett T, et al. Dual-modality PET/CT imaging: the effect of respiratory motion on combined image quality in clinical oncology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:588-96.
19. Veit P, Kühle C, Beyer T, et al. Whole body positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) tumour staging with integrated PET/CT colonography: technical feasibility and first experiences in patients with colorectal cancer. Gut 2006;55:68-73.
20. Crum WR, Hartkens T, Hill DL. Non-rigid image registration: theory and practice. Br J Radiol 2004;77:S140-53.
21. Lorenzen P, Prastawa M, Davis B, et al. Multimodal image set registration and atlas formation. Med Image Anal 2005 (in press).
22. Warfield SK, Talos F, Tei A, et al. Real-time registration of volumetric brain MRI by biomechanical simulation of deformation during image guided neurosurgery. Comput Visual Sci 2002;5:3-11.
23. Nain D, Haker S, Eric W, et al. Intra-patient prone to supine colon registration for synchronized virtual colonoscopy. Tokyo, Japan: M ICCAI 573-580, 2002.
24. Verhey JF, Wisser J, Warfield SK, et al. Non-rigid registration of a 3D ultrasound and a MR image data set of the female pelvic floor using a biomechanical model. Biomed Eng Online 2005;4:19.
25. Lange T, Eulenstein S, Hunerbein M, et al. Vessel-based non-rigid registration of MR/CT and 3D ultrasound for navigation in liver surgery. Comput Aided Surg 2003;8:228-40.
26. Behrenbruch CP, Marias K, Armitage PA, et al. Fusion of contrast-enhanced breast MR and mammographic imaging data. Med Image Anal 2003;7:311-40.
27. Ellsmere J, Stoll J, Wells W 3rd, et al. new visualization technique for laparoscopic ultrasonography. Surgery 2004;136:84-92.
28. Yezzi A, Zollei L, Kapur T. A variational framework for integrating segmentation and registration through active contours. Med Image Anal 2003;7:171-85.
29. Zollei L, Fisher JW, Wells WM. A unified statistical and information theoretic framework for multi-modal image registration. Inf Process Med Imaging 2003;18:366-77.
30. Metzger W. Certain implications in the concept of gestalt. Am J Psychol 1928;40:162-6.