MR colonography with limited bowel preparation compared with optical colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer

Radiology

Volumn 243, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 122-131

  Florie, Jasper ^a   Jensch, Sebastiaan ^a,b   Nievelstein, Rutger A J ^c   Bartelsman, Joep F ^a   Baak, Lubbertus C ^b   Van Gelder, Rogier E ^a   Haberkorn, Brigitte ^a   Van Randen, Adrienne ^a   Van Der Ham, Michiel M ^a   Snel, Pleun ^d   Van Der Hulst, Victor P M ^b   Bossuyt, Patrick M M ^a   Stoker, Jaap ^a  

^a ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis ^*  (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^d SLOTERVAART HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; GLUCAGON; LACTULOSE; LACTULOSE CF; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADENOMATOUS POLYP; ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; COLON POLYP; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIETARY FIBER; FAMILY HISTORY; FEMALE; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; INTESTINE PREPARATION; MAGNETIC RESONANCE COLONOGRAPHY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OPTICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 34147198820     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2431052088     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. 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.
2. van Gelder RE, Nio CY, Florie J, et al. Computed tomographic colonography compared with colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 2004;127:41-48.
3. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Smith H, ed. Ann ICRP 1991;21(1-3):1-201.
4. Brenner DJ, Georgsson MA. Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology 2005;129:328-337.
5. Gluecker TM, Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, et al. Colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography, colonoscopy, and double-contrast barium enema examination: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences. Radiology 2003;227:378-384.
6. van Gelder RE, Birnie E, Florie J, et al. CT colonography and colonoscopy: assessment of patient preference in a 5-week follow-up study. Kadiology 2004;233:328-337.
7. Ristvedt SL, McFarland EG, Weinstock LB, Thysson EP. Patient preferences for CT colonography, conventional colonoscopy, and bowel preparation. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:578-585.
8. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, Mangiapane F, Piacentini F, Passariello R. Feasibility of ultra-low-dose multislice CT colonography for the detection of colorectal lesions: preliminary experience. Eur Radiol 2003;13:1297-302.
9. van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Florie J, et al. CT colonography: feasibility of substantial dose reduction-comparison of medium to very low doses in identical patients. Radiology 2004;232:611-620.
10. Luboldt W, Bauerfeind P, Wildermuth S, Marincek B, Fried M, Debatin JF. Colonic masses: detection with MR colonography. Radiology 2000;216:388-388.
11. Ajaj W, Pelster G, Treichel U, et al. Dark lumen magnetic resonance oolonography: comparison with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal pathology. Gut 2003;52:1738-1748.
12. Pappalardo G, Polettini E, Frattaroli FM, et al. Magnetic resonance colonography versus conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colonic endoluminal lesions. Gastroenterology 2000;119:300-304.
13. Hartmann D, Bassler B, Schilling D, et al. Colorectal polyps: detection with dark-lumen MR colonography versus conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 2000;238:143-149.
14. Lenng WK, Lam WW, Wu JC, et al. Magnetic resonance colonography in the detection of colonic neoplasm in high-risk and average-risk individuals. Am J Gastroentorol 2004;99:102-108.
15. Weishaupt D, Patak MA, Froehlich J, Ruehm SG, Debatin JF. Faecal tagging to avoid colonic cleansing before MRI colonography. Lancet 1999;354:835-836.
16. Lauenstein T, Holtmann G, Sehoenfelder D, Bosk S, Ruehm SG, Debatin JF. MR colonography without colonic cleansing: a now strategy to improve patient acceptance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177:823-827.
17. Lauenstein TC, Goehde SC, Ruehm SG. Holtmann G, Debatin JF. MR colonography with barium-based fecal tagging: initial clinical experience. Radiology 2002;223:248-254.
18. Goehde SC, Descher E, Boekstegers A, et al. Dark lumen MR colonography based on fecal tagging for detection of colorectal masses: accuracy and patient acceptance. Abdomen Imaging aging 2005;30:576-583.
19. Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D, et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 2003;124:344-560.
20. 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.
21. Pepe MS. The statistical evaluation of medical tests for classification prediction: Oxford statistical science series 28. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2003; 33-65.
22. Burling O, Halligan S, Atchley J, et al. CT colonography: interpretive performance outside of a research environment [abstr]. Eur Radiol 2005;15(suppl 3):C15-C16.
23. Florie J, Van Gelder RE, Haberkorn B, et al. Magnetic resonance colonography with limited bowel preparation: a comparison of three strategies. J Magn Reson Imaging (in press).
24. Johnson CO, Harmsen WS, Wilson LA, et al. Prospective blinded evaluation of computed tomographic colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2003;125:311-319.
25. Cotton PB, Durkalski VL, Pineun BC, et al. Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 2004;291:1713-1719.
26. Hockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwieki D, et al. Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet 2005;365:305-311.
27. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. Computed tomographic colonographv without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2004;127:1300-1311.