Literature DB >> 19041207

Patient acceptance of MR colonography with improved fecal tagging versus conventional colonoscopy.

M P Achiam1, V Løgager, E Chabanova, H S Thomsen, J Rosenberg.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Conventional colonoscopy (CC) is the gold standard for colonic examinations. However, patient acceptance is not high. Patient acceptance is influenced by several factors, notably anticipation and experience. This has led to the assumption that patient acceptance would be higher in non-invasive examinations such as MR/CT colonography (MRC/CTC) and perhaps even higher without bowel preparation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient acceptance of MRC with fecal tagging versus CC.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a 14-month period, all patients first-time referred to our department for CC were asked to participate in the study. Two days prior to MRC, patients ingested an oral contrast mixture (barium/ferumoxsil) together with four meals each day. Standard bowel purgation was performed before CC. Before and after MRC and CC a number of questions were addressed.
RESULTS: Sixty-four (34 men, 30 women) patients referred for CC participated in the study. 27% had some discomfort ingesting the contrast mixture, and 49% had some discomfort with the bowel purgation. As a future colonic examination preference, 71% preferred MRC, 13% preferred CC and 15% had no preference. If MRC was to be performed with bowel purgation, 75% would prefer MRC, 12% would prefer CC and 12% had no preference.
CONCLUSION: This study shows that there is a potential gain in patient acceptance by using MRC for colonic examination, since MRC is considered less painful and less unpleasant than CC. In addition, the results indicate that patients in this study prefer fecal tagging instead of bowel purgation. Copyright (c) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19041207     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.10.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Radiol        ISSN: 0720-048X            Impact factor:   3.528


  4 in total

Review 1.  Preference for colonoscopy versus computerized tomographic colonography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Authors:  Otto S Lin; Richard A Kozarek; Michael Gluck; Geoffrey C Jiranek; Johannes Koch; Kris V Kowdley; Shayan Irani; Matthew Nguyen; Jason A Dominitz
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-06-15       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Patient satisfaction with coronary CT angiography, myocardial CT perfusion, myocardial perfusion MRI, SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging and conventional coronary angiography.

Authors:  S Feger; M Rief; E Zimmermann; F Richter; R Roehle; M Dewey; E Schönenberger
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-03-13       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging without bowel preparation for detection of ulcerative colitis.

Authors:  Li-Li Yu; Hai-Shan Yang; Bu-Tian Zhang; Zhong-Wen Lv; Fu-Rong Wang; Chun-Yu Zhang; Wei-Bo Chen; Hui-Mao Zhang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-09-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 4.  Screening for colorectal cancer: possible improvements by risk assessment evaluation?

Authors:  Hans J Nielsen; Karen V Jakobsen; Ib J Christensen; Nils Brünner
Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-08-19       Impact factor: 2.423

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.