MR Colonography

Radiologic Clinics of North America

Volumn 45, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 377-387

  Kinner, Sonja ^a   Lauenstein, Thomas C ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ESSEN   (Germany)

^b EMORY UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COLONOSCOPY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; INFLAMMATORY DISEASE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECTUM TUMOR; REVIEW;

COLONIC DISEASES; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; CONTRAST MEDIA; ENEMA; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

EID: 34248194834     PISSN: 00338389     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2007.03.004     Document Type: Review

References (63)

1. Kahi C.J., and Rex D.K. Screening and surveillance of colorectal cancer. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 15 (2005) 533-547
2. Scholmerich J. Inflammatory bowel disease. Endoscopy 35 (2003) 164-170
3. Akerkar G.A., Yer J., Hung, et al. Patient experience and preferences toward colon cancer screening: a comparison of virtual colonoscopy and conventional colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 54 (2001) 310-315
4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Trends in screening for colorectal cancer-United States, 1997 and 1999. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 50 9 (2001) 162-166
5. Mant D., Fuller A., Northover J., et al. Patient compliance with colorectal cancer screening in general practice. Br J Gen Pract 42 (1992) 18-20
6. Frommer D.J. What's new in colorectal cancer screening?. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 13 (1998) 528-533
7. Dominitz J.A., EIsen G.M., Baron T.H., et al. Complications of colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 57 (2003) 441-445
8. Dafnis G., Granath F., Pahlman L., et al. Patient factors influencing the completion rate in colonoscopy. Dig Liver Dis 37 (2005) 113-118
9. Cirocco W.C., and Rusin L.C. Factors that predict incomplete colonoscopy. Dis Colon Rectum 389 (1995) 964-968
10. Vining D.J., Gelfand D.W., Bechtold R.E., et al. Technical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162 (1994) 104
11. Geenen R.W., Hussain S.M., Cademartiri F., et al. CT and MR colonography: scanning techniques, postprocessing, and emphasis on polyp detection. Radiographics 24 (2004) e18
12. Royster A.P., Fenlon H.M., Clarke P.D., et al. CT colonoscopy of colorectal neoplasms: two-dimensional and three-dimensional virtual-reality techniques with colonoscopic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169 (1997) 1237-1242
13. McFarland E.G., Brink J.A., Pilgram T.K., et al. Spiral CT colonography: reader agreement and diagnostic performance with two- and three-dimensional image-display techniques. Radiology 218 (2001) 375-383
14. Thomeer M., Bielen D., Vanbeckevoort D., et al. Patient acceptance for CT colonography: what is the real issue?. Eur Radiol 12 (2002) 1410-1415
15. Svensson M.H., Svensson E., Lasson A., et al. Patient acceptance of CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy: prospective comparative study in patients with or suspected of having colorectal disease. Radiology 222 (2002) 337-345
16. Van Gelder R.E., Birnie E., Florie J., et al. CT colonography and colonoscopy: assessment of patient preference in a 5-week follow-up study. Radiology 233 (2004) 328-337
17. Tan J.J., and Tjandra J.J. Which is the optimal bowel preparation for colonoscopy-a meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis 8 (2006) 247-258
18. Ajaj W., Lauenstein T.C., Pelster G., et al. MR colonography: how does air compare to water for colonic distention?. J Magn Reson Imaging 19 (2004) 216-221
19. Bielen D.J., Bosmans H.T., De Wever L.L., et al. Clinical validation of high-resolution fast spin-echo MR colonography after colon distention with air. J Magn Reson Imaging 22 (2005) 400-405
20. Lomas D.J., Sood R.R., Graves M.J., et al. Colon carcinoma: MR imaging with CO2 enema-pilot study. Radiology 219 (2001) 558-562
21. Luboldt W., Frohlich J.M., Schneider N., et al. MR colonography: optimized enema composition. Radiology 212 (1999) 265-269
22. Rogalla P., Lembcke A., Ruckert J.C., et al. Spasmolysis at CT colonography: butyl scopolamine versus glucagon. Radiology 236 (2005) 184-188
23. Wessling J., Fischbach R., Borchert A., et al. Detection of colorectal polyps: comparison of multi-detector row CT and MR colonography in a colon phantom. Radiology 241 (2006) 125-131
24. Rottgen R., Herzog H., Bogen P., et al. MR colonoscopy at 3.0 T: comparison with 1.5 T in vivo and a colon model. Clin Imaging 30 (2006) 248-253
25. Pickhardt P.J., Taylor A.J., and Gopal D.V. Surface visualization at 3D endoluminal CT colonography: degree of coverage and implications for polyp detection. Gastroenterology 130 (2006) 1582-1587
26. Pappalardo G., Polettini E., Frattaroli F.M., et al. Magnetic resonance colonography versus conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colonic endoluminal lesions. Gastroenterology 119 (2000) 300-304
27. Luboldt W., Bauerfeind P., Wildermuth S., et al. Colonic masses: detection with MR colonography. Radiology 216 (2000) 383-388
28. Saar B., Heverhagen J.T., Obst T., et al. Magnetic resonance colonography and virtual magnetic resonance colonoscopy with the 1.0-T system: a feasibility study. Invest Radiol 35 (2000) 521-526
29. Lauenstein T.C., Ajaj W., Kuehle C.A., et al. Magnetic resonance colonography: comparison of contrast-enhanced three-dimensional vibe with two-dimensional FISP sequences: preliminary experience. Invest Radiol 40 (2005) 89-96
30. Hartmann D., Bassler B., Schilling D., et al. Colorectal polyps: detection with dark-lumen MR colonography versus conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 238 (2006) 143-149
31. Ajaj W., Pelster G., Treichel U., et al. Dark lumen magnetic resonance colonography: comparison with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal pathology. Gut 52 (2003) 1738-1743
32. Villavicencio R.T., and Rex D.K. Colonic adenomas: prevalence and incidence rates, growth rates, and miss rates at colonoscopy. Semin Gastrointest Dis 11 (2000) 185-193
33. Kuehle C.A., Langhorst J., Ladd S.C., et al. MR colonography without bowel cleansing-a prospective cross-sectional study in a screening population. Gut (2007) [Epub ahead of print]
34. Fiocca R., and Ceppa P. The diagnostic reliability of endoscopic biopsies in diagnosis colitis. J Clin Pathol 56 (2003) 321-322
35. Nahon S., Bouhnik Y., Lavergne-Slove A., et al. Colonoscopy accurately predicts the anatomical severity of colonic Crohn's disease attacks: correlation with findings from colectomy specimens. Am J Gastroenterol 12 (2002) 3102-3107
36. Kettritz U., Isaacs K., Warshauer D.M., et al. Crohn's disease. Pilot study comparing MRI of the abdomen with clinical evaluation. J Clin Gastroenterol 3 (1995) 249-253
37. Koh D.M., Miao Y., Chinn R.J., et al. MR imaging evaluation of the activity of Crohn's disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 6 (2001) 1325-1332
38. Ajaj W., Lauenstein T.C., Pelster G., et al. MR colonography for the detection of inflammatory diseases of the large bowel: quantifying the inflammatory activity. Gut 54 (2005) 257-263
39. Schreyer A.G., Golder S., Scheibl K., et al. Dark lumen magnetic resonance enteroclysis in combination with MRI colonography for whole bowel assessment in patients with Crohn's disease: first clinical experience. Inflamm Bowel Dis 11 (2005) 388-394
40. Schreyer A.G., Rath H.C., Kikinis R., et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging colonography with conventional colonoscopy for the assessment of intestinal inflammation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a feasibility study. Gut 54 (2005) 250-256
41. Florie J., Wasser M.N., Arts-Cieslik K., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the bowel wall for assessment of disease activity in Crohn's disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186 (2006) 1384-1392
42. Maccioni F., Bruni A., Viscido A., et al. MR imaging in patients with Crohn disease: value of T2- versus T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced MR sequences with use of an oral superparamagnetic contrast agent. Radiology 238 (2006) 517-530
43. Gore R.M., Balthazar E.J., Ghahremani G.G., et al. CT features of ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. AJR 167 (1996) 3-15
44. Narin B., Ajaj W., Gohde S., et al. Combined small and large bowel MR imaging in patients with Crohn's disease: a feasibility study. Eur Radiol 14 (2004) 1535-1542
45. Hartmann D., Bassler B., Schilling D., et al. Incomplete conventional colonoscopy: magnetic resonance colonography in the evaluation of the proximal colon. Endoscopy 37 (2005) 816-820
46. Ajaj W., Lauenstein T.C., Pelster G., et al. MR colonography in patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 234 (2005) 452-459
47. Eu K.W., Seow-Choen F., Ho J.M., et al. Local recurrence following rectal resection for cancer. J R Coll Surg Edinb 43 (1998) 393-396
48. Ajaj W., Goyen M., Langhorst J., et al. MR colonography for the assessment of colonic anastomoses. J Magn Reson Imaging 24 (2006) 101-107
49. Buhmann S., Kirchhoff C., Wielage C., et al. Assessment of large bowel motility by cine magnetic resonance imaging using two different prokinetic agents: a feasibility study. Invest Radiol 40 (2005) 689-694
50. Ristvedt S.L., McFarland E.G., Weinstock L.B., et al. Patient preferences for CT colonography, conventional colonography, and bowel preparation. Am J Gastroenterol 98 (2003) 578-585
51. Lauenstein T.C., Goehde S.C., Ruehm S.G., et al. MR colonography with barium-based fecal tagging: initial clinical experience. Radiology 223 (2002) 248-254
52. Ajaj W., Lauenstein T.C., Schneemann H., et al. Magnetic resonance colonography without bowel cleansing using oral and rectal stool softeners (fecal cracking)-a feasibility study. Eur Radiol 15 (2005) 2079-2087
53. Kinner S, Kuehle CA, Langhorst J, et al. MR colonography vs. optical colonoscopy: comparison of patient acceptance in a screening population. European Radiology, accepted for publication.
54. Taylor S.A., Halligan S., Goh V., et al. Optimizing colonic distention for multi-detector row CT colonography: effect of hyoscine butylbromide and rectal balloon catheter. Radiology 229 (2003) 99-108
55. Haykir R., Karakose S., Karabacakoglu A., et al. Three-dimensional MR and axial CT colonography versus conventional colonoscopy for detection of colon pathologies. World J Gastroenterol 12 (2006) 2345-2350
56. Debatin J.F., Luboldt W., and Bauerfeind P. Virtual colonoscopy in 1999: computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging?. Endoscopy 31 (1999) 174-179
57. Martin D.R., and Semelka R.C. Health effects of ionising radiation from diagnostic CT. Lancet 367 (2006) 1712-1714
58. National Research Council Committee to Assess Healt Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2006. Available at: http://www.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html.
59. Brenner D.J., and Elliston C.D. Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiology 232 (2004) 735-738
60. Cohnen M., Vogt C., Beck A., et al. Feasibility of MDCT colonography in ultra-low-dose technique in the detection of colorectal lesions: comparison with high-resolution video colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183 (2004) 1355-1359
61. van Gelder R.E., Venema H.W., Florie J., et al. CT colonography: feasibility of substantial dose reduction-comparison of medium to very low doses in identical patients. Radiology 232 (2004) 611-620
62. Murphy K.J., Brunberg J.A., and Cohan R.H. Adverse reactions to gadolinium contrast media: a review of 36 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167 (1996) 847-849
63. Prince M.R., Arnoldus C., and Frisoli J.K. Nephrotoxicity of high-dose gadolinium compared with iodinated contrast. J Magn Reson Imaging 6 (1996) 162-166