Literature DB >> 15591429

MR colonography in patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopy.

Waleed Ajaj1, Thomas C Lauenstein, Gregor Pelster, Gerald Holtmann, Stefan G Ruehm, Joerg F Debatin, Susanne C Goehde.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess dark-lumen magnetic resonance (MR) colonography for the evaluation of colonic segments in patients in whom conventional colonoscopy could not be completed.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and written informed consent were obtained. Within 24 hours of incomplete conventional colonoscopy, 37 patients (22 women, 15 men; age range, 25-63 years) underwent MR colonography. Contrast material-enhanced T1-weighted three-dimensional images were collected after rectal administration of water for colonic distention. Data from MR colonography were evaluated by two radiologists. With a three-point scale, image quality was characterized in terms of colonic distention (1 = good; 2 = moderate, diagnostic; and 3 = poor, nondiagnostic) and presence of artifacts (1 = none; 2 = moderate, diagnostic; and 3 = extensive, nondiagnostic). Depiction of colorectal disease was assessed according to the following colonic segments: cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, descending colon, sigmoid colon, and rectum.
RESULTS: Four patients had history of colorectal cancer, and each had undergone partial colonic resection of two segments. Hence, 214 segments were evaluated. Conventional colonoscopy failed in assessment of 127 of 214 potentially visible colonic segments in the 37 patients. MR image quality was rated diagnostic in 35 patients and permitted assessment of 206 of 214 potentially visible segments. Nondiagnostic image quality in two patients was attributed to inadequate distention of prestenotic colonic segments owing to high-grade tumor stenosis. All inflammation- and tumor-induced stenoses and all five polyps identified at conventional colonoscopy in poststenotic segments were correctly detected at MR colonography. However, MR-based assessment of prestenotic segments revealed two lesions suspected of being carcinoma, five polyps, and four segments affected by colitis.
CONCLUSION: MR colonography proved reliable in evaluating the majority of colonic segments inaccessible with conventional colonoscopy. The identification of additional disease at MR colonography underscores the need for a second diagnostic step in the setting of incomplete conventional colonoscopy. (c) RSNA, 2004.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15591429     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2342032001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  12 in total

1.  Combined PET/CT colonography: is this the way forward?

Authors:  A G Schreyer; R Kikinis
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  The future of virtual colonography. Interview by Paul C Adams.

Authors:  Helen Fenlon
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.522

Review 3.  [MR colography: technique, indications, and findings].

Authors:  T C Lauenstein; S Kinner; S C Ladd
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  Bimodal visualization of colorectal uptake of nanoparticles in dimethylhydrazine-treated mice.

Authors:  Tao Wu; Wei-Liang Zheng; Shi-Zheng Zhang; Ji-Hong Sun; Hong Yuan
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-08-21       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 5.  MR colonography: current status.

Authors:  Thomas C Lauenstein
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-04-20       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  Alternatives to Incomplete Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Nicolas A Villa; Rahul Pannala; Shabana F Pasha; Jonathan A Leighton
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2015-11

7.  Colorectal neoplasm: magnetic resonance colonography with fat enema-initial clinical experience.

Authors:  Shuai Zhang; Jun-Wei Peng; Qiang-Ying Shi; Feng Tang; Min-Guo Zhong
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-10-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 8.  Colonography by CT, MRI and PET/CT combined with conventional colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening and staging.

Authors:  Long Sun; Hua Wu; Yong-Song Guan
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-02-14       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Annotation and retrieval of clinically relevant images.

Authors:  Dina Demner-Fushman; Sameer Antani; Matthew Simpson; George R Thoma
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2009-07-09       Impact factor: 4.046

Review 10.  Magnetic resonance (MR) colonography in the detection of colorectal lesions: a systematic review of prospective studies.

Authors:  Frank M Zijta; Shandra Bipat; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-11-21       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.