PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare a dark-lumen magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) approach with a True FISP-based bright-lumen technique concerning presence of artifacts and the detection rate of colorectal pathologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with suspected colorectal lesions were included in this trial. The colon was filled with 2500 mL of tap water. Two-dimensional True FISP datasets as well as T1-weighted GRE sequences (pre- and post intravenous contrast) were acquired. The detection rate of colorectal masses and inflammatory lesions was determined for both techniques separately. Besides, image quality was assessed. All patients underwent conventional colonoscopy as the standard of reference. RESULTS: By means of dark-lumen MRC datasets, all polyps >5 mm were correctly diagnosed, whereas 4 polyps <5 mm were missed. Sensitivity of dark-lumen MRC amounted to 78.9%. There were no false-positive results: residual stool could correctly be differentiated from colorectal masses. The True FISP-based bright-lumen MRC, however, failed to detect 2 additional polyps resulting in a sensitivity of 68.4%. Furthermore, bright-lumen MRC led to false-positive results in 5 patients. Both techniques visualized inflammatory bowel disease in 5 patients. However, image quality of True FISP was rated superior to that of dark-lumen MRC. CONCLUSION: Dark-lumen MRC proved to be superior over bright-lumen MRC regarding the detection of colorectal masses. However, True FISP imaging can turn out to be helpful as a result of high image quality and motion insensitivity.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare a dark-lumen magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) approach with a True FISP-based bright-lumen technique concerning presence of artifacts and the detection rate of colorectal pathologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with suspected colorectal lesions were included in this trial. The colon was filled with 2500 mL of tapwater. Two-dimensional True FISP datasets as well as T1-weighted GRE sequences (pre- and post intravenous contrast) were acquired. The detection rate of colorectal masses and inflammatory lesions was determined for both techniques separately. Besides, image quality was assessed. All patients underwent conventional colonoscopy as the standard of reference. RESULTS: By means of dark-lumen MRC datasets, all polyps >5 mm were correctly diagnosed, whereas 4 polyps <5 mm were missed. Sensitivity of dark-lumen MRC amounted to 78.9%. There were no false-positive results: residual stool could correctly be differentiated from colorectal masses. The True FISP-based bright-lumen MRC, however, failed to detect 2 additional polyps resulting in a sensitivity of 68.4%. Furthermore, bright-lumen MRC led to false-positive results in 5 patients. Both techniques visualized inflammatory bowel disease in 5 patients. However, image quality of True FISP was rated superior to that of dark-lumen MRC. CONCLUSION: Dark-lumen MRC proved to be superior over bright-lumen MRC regarding the detection of colorectal masses. However, True FISP imaging can turn out to be helpful as a result of high image quality and motion insensitivity.
Authors: Christiane A Kuehle; Jost Langhorst; Susanne C Ladd; Thomas Zoepf; Michael Nuefer; Florian Grabellus; Joerg Barkhausen; Guido Gerken; Thomas C Lauenstein Journal: Gut Date: 2007-03-06 Impact factor: 23.059