BACKGROUND & AIMS: The most effective prophylaxis for colorectal cancer is endoscopic polypectomy. Prompted by the disadvantages of conventional colonoscopy (CC), we assessed the diagnostic ability of a promising alternative technique for detecting endoluminal masses: magnetic resonance colonography (MRC). METHODS: Seventy consecutive patients referred for CC underwent preliminary MRC. The diagnostic ability of this technique in detecting colonic endoluminal lesions was determined, compared with that of CC, and related to the findings from histologic examination. RESULTS: In detecting endoluminal lesions, MRC achieved a diagnostic accuracy similar to CC (sensitivity, 96%; specificity, 93%; positive predictive value, 98%; and negative predictive value, 87.5%). CONCLUSIONS: MRC could be useful in screening programs of patients at high risk for colon cancer. Patients with MRC-detected endoluminal lesions must undergo CC for histologic diagnosis.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The most effective prophylaxis for colorectal cancer is endoscopic polypectomy. Prompted by the disadvantages of conventional colonoscopy (CC), we assessed the diagnostic ability of a promising alternative technique for detecting endoluminal masses: magnetic resonance colonography (MRC). METHODS: Seventy consecutive patients referred for CC underwent preliminary MRC. The diagnostic ability of this technique in detecting colonic endoluminal lesions was determined, compared with that of CC, and related to the findings from histologic examination. RESULTS: In detecting endoluminal lesions, MRC achieved a diagnostic accuracy similar to CC (sensitivity, 96%; specificity, 93%; positive predictive value, 98%; and negative predictive value, 87.5%). CONCLUSIONS: MRC could be useful in screening programs of patients at high risk for colon cancer. Patients with MRC-detected endoluminal lesions must undergo CC for histologic diagnosis.
Authors: M Koch; P Kienle; P Sauer; F Willeke; K Buhl; A Benner; T Lehnert; C Herfarth; M von Knebel Doeberitz; J Weitz Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2004-01-23 Impact factor: 4.584