Colorectal polyps: Detection with dark-lumen MR colonography versus conventional colonoscopy

Radiology

Volumn 238, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 143-149

  Hartmann, Dirk ^a   Bassler, Boris ^a   Schilling, Dieter ^a   Adamek, Henning E ^a   Jakobs, Ralf ^a   Pfeifer, Barbara ^a   Eickhoff, Axel ^a   Zindel, Christoph ^b   Riemann, Jürgen F ^a   Layer, Günter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER MAINZ   (Germany)

^b SIEMENS AG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GADOBENATE DIMEGLUMINE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREATH HOLDING; COLON POLYP; COLONOSCOPY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RECTUM POLYP; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VOLUMETRY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOSCOPY; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MEGLUMINE; MIDDLE AGED; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUNDS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 29444437387     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2381041756     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Pappalardo G, Polettini E, Frattaroli FM, et al. Magnetic resonance colonography versus conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colonic endoluininal lesions. Gastroenterology 2000;119:300-304.
2. Luboldt W, Steiner P, Bauerfeind P, Pelkonen P, Debatin JF. Detection of mass lesions with MR colonography: preliminary report. Radiology 1998;207:59-65.
3. 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;52:1738-1743.
4. Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy PC III, Barish MA, Clarke PD, Ferrucci JT, A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1496-1503.
5. Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, Steinauer-Gehauer AM, Wall SD, McQuaid KR. Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology 2001;219:685-692.
6. Johnson CD, Toledano AY, Herman BA, et al. Computerized tomographic colonography: performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting. Gastroenterology 2003;125:688-695.
7. Pineau BC, Paskett ED, Chen GJ, et al. Virtual colonoscopy using oral contrast compared with colonoscopy for the detection of patients with colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2003;125:304-310.
8. 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;349:2191-2200.
9. Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT, et al. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997;112:24-28.
10. Hixson LJ, Fennerty MB, Sampliner RE, McGee D, Garewal H. Prospective study of the frequency and size distribution of polyps missed by colonoscopy. J Natl Cancer Inst 1990;82:1769-1772.
11. Hixson LJ, Fennerty MB, Sampliner RE, Garewal HS. Prospective blinded trial of the colonoscopic miss-rate of large colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 1991;37:125-127.
12. Rembacken BJ, Fujii T, Cairns A, et al. Flat and depressed colonic neoplasms: a prospective study of 1000 colonoscopies in the UK. Lancet 2000;355:1211-1214.