Literature DB >> 16304088

Colorectal polyps: detection with dark-lumen MR colonography versus conventional colonoscopy.

Dirk Hartmann1, Boris Bassler, Dieter Schilling, Henning E Adamek, Ralf Jakobs, Barbara Pfeifer, Axel Eickhoff, Christoph Zindel, Jürgen F Riemann, Günter Layer.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare dark-lumen magnetic resonance (MR) colonography with conventional colonoscopy in the detection of colorectal polyps.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Local ethical committee approval and informed consent were obtained. One hundred consecutive patients (56 men, 44 women; mean age +/- standard deviation, 67.7 years +/- 14.7; range, 25-82 years) who were referred for conventional colonoscopy from January 2003 to January 2004 underwent MR colonography and conventional colonoscopy after standard precolonoscopic bowel cleansing. Colonoscopy was performed immediately after MR colonography. For MR colonography, the colon was filled with approximately 2000 mL of tap water. Imaging was performed with a 1.5-T MR unit with patients in the prone position. A T1-weighted three-dimensional volumetric interpolated breath-hold sequence was performed before and 75 seconds after intravenous administration of 0.2 mmol gadobenate dimeglumine per kilogram of body weight. Results of MR colonography were analyzed on a per-polyp and per-patient basis. Findings at colonoscopy were used as the reference for determining accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of MR colonography.
RESULTS: Of 100 patients recruited for study, 92 (52 men, 40 women; mean age, 61.5 years +/- 14.5; range, 25-82 years) underwent complete MR and conventional colonoscopy examinations. Forty-three of the 92 patients (47%) had normal findings at conventional colonoscopy. In the other 49 patients (53%), conventional colonoscopy depicted 107 polyps (82 adenomas, 25 hyperplastic polyps) and seven carcinomas. At per-polyp analysis, sensitivity of MR colonography in the detection of adenomatous polyps was 100% for polyps at least 10 mm in diameter and 84.2% for polyps 6-9 mm in diameter. At per-patient analysis, the accuracy of MR colonography was 93.1% (sensitivity, 89%; specificity, 96%) if detection of adenomatous polyps of all sizes was considered.
CONCLUSION: Dark-lumen MR colonography is a promising modality with high accuracy for detecting colorectal polyps larger than 5 mm in diameter. RSNA, 2005.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16304088     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2381041756

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


  25 in total

Review 1.  Current status of CT colonography.

Authors:  Suzanne M Frentz; Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 2.  [MR colography: technique, indications, and findings].

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

Review 3.  [Indications for magnetic resonance imaging in Internal Medicine. When do we really need this technology?].

Authors:  A G Schreyer; K Debl; H Herfarth
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 0.743

4.  Magnetic Resonance (MR) Colonography for Colorectal Cancer Screening: An Evidence-Based Analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2009-09-01

5.  Screening methods for early detection of colorectal cancers and polyps: summary of evidence-based analyses.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2009-09-01

Review 6.  MR colonography: current status.

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

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

8.  The potential of imaging techniques as a screening tool for colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Marjolein J E Greuter; Johannes Berkhof; Remond J A Fijneman; Erhan Demirel; Jie-Bin Lew; Gerrit A Meijer; Jaap Stoker; Veerle M H Coupé
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  MR colonography with a fecal tagging technique and water-based enema for the assessment of inflammatory bowel disease.

Authors:  Piero Boraschi; Francescamaria Donati
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2016-05-21       Impact factor: 2.374

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.