Magnetic resonance colonography in clinical use: How far have we come?

References

• Vining, DJ GD. Noninvasive colonoscopy using helical CT scanning, 3D reconstruction and virtual reality. SGR Scientific Program 1994 February 13; Maui, Hawaii (Feb 1994:70).
   Google Scholar
• Luboldt W, Bauerfeind P, Steiner P, Fried M, Krestin GP, Debatin JF. Preliminary assessment of three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging for various colonic disorders. Lancet 1997; 349: 1288–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achiam MP, Bulow S, Rosenberg J. CT- and MR colonography. Scand J Surg 2002; 91: 322–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajaj W, Lauenstein TC, Schneemann H, Kuehle C, Herborn CU, Goehde SC, et al. Magnetic resonance colonography without bowel cleansing using oral and rectal stool softeners (fecal cracking): a feasibility study. Eur Radiol 2005; 15: 2079–87
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajaj W, Veit P, Kuehle C, Joekel M, Lauenstein TC, Herborn CU. Digital subtraction dark-lumen MR colonography: initial experience. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 21: 841–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Luboldt W, Luz O, Vonthein R, Heuschmid M, Seemann M, Schaefer J, et al. Three-dimensional double-contrast MR colonography: a display method simulating double-contrast barium enema. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176: 930–2
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weishaupt D, Patak MA, Froehlich J, Ruehm SG, Debatin JF. Fecal tagging to avoid colonic cleansing before MRI colonography. Lancet 1999; 354: 835–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juchems MS, Fleiter TR, Pauls S, Schmidt SA, Brambs HJ, Aschoff AJ. CT colonography: comparison of a colon dissection display versus 3D endoluminal view for the detection of polyps. Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 68–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Summers RM, Johnson CD, Pusanik LM, Malley JD, Youssef AM, Reed JE. Automated polyp detection at CT colonography: feasibility assessment in a human population. Radiology 2001; 219: 51–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pochaczevsky R. Stool tagging with barium for CT colonography. Radiology 2001; 221: 850–1
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pickhardt PJ. Translucency rendering in 3D endoluminal CT colonography: a useful tool for increasing polyp specificity and decreasing interpretation time. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183: 429–36
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Florie J, Jensch S, Nievelstein RA, Bartelsman JF, Baak LC, van Gelder RE, et al. MR colonography with limited bowel preparation compared with optical colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. Radiology 2007; 243: 122–31
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hartmann D, Bassler B, Schilling D, Adamek HE, Jakobs R, Pfeifer B, et al. Colorectal polyps: detection with dark-lumen MR colonography versus conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 2006; 238: 143–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Liedenbaum MH, Venema HW, Stoker J. Radiation dose in CT colonography: trends in time and differences between daily practice and screening protocols. Eur Radiol 2008; 18: 2222–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Commission on Radiological Protection. Recommendations of the ICRP: ICRP Publication 103. Ann ICRP 2007;37.
   Google Scholar
• Saar B, Meining A, Beer A, Settles M, Helmberger H, Frimberger E, et al. Prospective study on bright lumen magnetic resonance colonography in comparison with conventional colonoscopy. Br J Radiol 2007; 80: 235–41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wong TY, Lam WW, So NM, Lee JF, Leung KL. Air-inflated magnetic resonance colonography in patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopy: comparison with intraoperative findings, pathology specimens, and follow-up conventional colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 56–63
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajaj W, Lauenstein TC, Pelster G, Holtmann G, Ruehm SG, Debatin JF, et al. MR colonography in patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 2005; 234: 452–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hartmann D, Bassler B, Schilling D, Pfeiffer B, Jakobs R, Eickhoff A, et al. Incomplete conventional colonoscopy: magnetic resonance colonography in the evaluation of the proximal colon. Endoscopy 2005; 37: 816–20
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Adloff M, Arnaud JP, Bergamaschi R, Schloegel M. Synchronous carcinoma of the colon and rectum: prognostic and therapeutic implications. Am J Surg 1989; 157: 299–302
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bat L, Neumann G, Shemesh E. The association of synchronous neoplasms with occluding colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 1985; 28: 149–51
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cunliffe WJ, Hasleton PS, Tweedle DE, Schofield PF. Incidence of synchronous and metachronous colorectal carcinoma. Br J Surg 1984; 71: 941–3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isler JT, Brown PC, Lewis FG, Billingham RP. The role of preoperative colonoscopy in colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 1987; 30: 435–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikoloudis N, Saliangas K, Economou A, Andreadis E, Siminou S, Manna I, et al. Synchronous colorectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol ;8 Suppl 2004; 1: 177–9
   Google Scholar
• Neri E, Giusti P, Battolla L, Vagli P, Boraschi P, Lencioni R, et al. Colorectal cancer: role of CT colonography in preoperative evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy. Radiology 2002; 223: 615–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leslie A, Carey FA, Pratt NR, Steele RJ. The colorectal adenoma-carcinoma sequence. Br J Surg Jul 2002; 89: 845–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achiam, MP, Logager, VB, Chabanova, E, Eegholm, B, Thomsen, HS, Rosenberg, J. Diagnostic accuracy of MR colonography with fecal tagging. Abdom Imaging 2008. [Epub ahead of print].
   Google Scholar
• Ajaj W, Ruehm SG, Gerken G, Goyen M. Strengths and weaknesses of dark-lumen MR colonography: clinical relevance of polyps smaller than 5 mm in diameter at the moment of their detection. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24: 1088–94
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hurlstone DP, Cross SS, Adam I, Shorthouse AJ, Brown S, Sanders DS, et al. A prospective clinicopathological and endoscopic evaluation of flat and depressed colorectal lesions in the United Kingdom. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98: 2543–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rembacken BJ, Fujii T, Cairns A, Dixon MF, Yoshida S, Chalmers DM, et al. Flat and depressed colonic neoplasms: a prospective study of 1000 colonoscopies in the UK. Lancet 2000; 355: 1211–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuehle CA, Langhorst J, Ladd SC, Zoepf T, Nuefer M, Grabellus F, et al. Magnetic resonance colonography without bowel cleansing: a prospective cross-sectional study in a screening population. Gut 2007; 56: 1079–85
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajaj WM, Lauenstein TC, Pelster G, Gerken G, Ruehm SG, Debatin JF, et al. Magnetic resonance colonography for the detection of inflammatory diseases of the large bowel: quantifying the inflammatory activity. Gut 2005; 54: 257–63
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schreyer AG, Rath HC, Kikinis R, Volk M, Scholmerich J, Feuerbach S, et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging colonography with conventional colonoscopy for the assessment of intestinal inflammation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a feasibility study. Gut 2005; 54: 250–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajaj W, Ruehm SG, Lauenstein T, Goehde S, Kuehle C, Herborn CU, et al. Dark-lumen magnetic resonance colonography in patients with suspected sigmoid diverticulitis: a feasibility study. Eur Radiol 2005; 15: 2316–22
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Heverhagen JT, Sitter H, Zielke A, Klose KJ. Prospective evaluation of the value of magnetic resonance imaging in suspected acute sigmoid diverticulitis. Dis Colon Rectum 2008; 51: 1810–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajaj W, Ruehm SG, Ladd SC, Gerken G, Goyen M. Utility of dark-lumen MR colonography for the assessment of extra-colonic organs. Eur Radiol 2007; 17: 1574–83
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajaj W, Goyen M, Langhorst J, Ruehm SG, Gerken G, Lauenstein TC. MR colonography for the assessment of colonic anastomoses. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24: 101–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajaj W, Pelster G, Treichel U, Vogt FM, Debatin JF, Ruehm SG, et al. Dark lumen magnetic resonance colonography: comparison with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal pathology. Gut 2003; 52: 1738–43
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajaj W, Debatin JF, Lauenstein T. Dark-lumen MR colonography. Abdom Imaging 2004; 29: 429–33
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Haykir R, Karakose S, Karabacakoglu A, Sahin M, Kayacetin E. Three-dimensional MR and axial CT colonography versus conventional colonoscopy for detection of colon pathologies. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12: 2345–50
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lauenstein TC, Herborn CU, Vogt FM, Gohde SC, Debatin JF, Ruehm SG. Dark lumen MR-colonography: initial experience. ROEFO 2001; 173: 785–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lauenstein TC, Goehde SC, Ruehm SG, Holtmann G, Debatin JF. MR colonography with barium-based fecal tagging: initial clinical experience. Radiology 2002; 223: 248–54
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Achiam MP, Chabanova E, Logager VB, Thomsen HS, Rosenberg J. MR colonography with fecal tagging: barium vs. barium ferumoxsil. Acad Radiol 2008; 15: 576–83
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Florie J, Birnie E, van Gelder RE, Jensch S, Haberkorn B, Bartelsman JF, et al. MR colonography with limited bowel preparation: patient acceptance compared with that of full-preparation colonoscopy. Radiology 2007; 245: 150–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Knopp MV, Giesel FL, Radeleff J, von Tengg-Kobligk H. Bile-tagged 3D magnetic resonance colonography after exclusive intravenous administration of gadobenate dimeglumine, a contrast agent with partial hepatobiliary excretion. Invest Radiol 2001; 36: 619–23
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Achiam, MP, Logager, V, Chabanova, E, Thomsen, HS, Rosenberg, J. Patient acceptance of MR colonography with improved fecal tagging versus conventional colonoscopy. Eur J Radiol. [Epub ahead of print], 2008.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hagspiel KD, Altes TA, Mugler JP III, Spellman MJ., Jr., Mata JF, Tustison NJ, et al. MR virtual colonography using hyperpolarized (3)He as an endoluminal contrast agent: demonstration of feasibility. Magn Reson Med 2000; 44: 813–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajaj W, Lauenstein TC, Pelster G, Goehde SC, Debatin JF, Ruehm SG. MR colonography: how does air compare to water for colonic distention?. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 19: 216–21
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bielen DJ, Bosmans HT, De Wever LL, Maes F, Tejpar S, Vanbeckevoort D, et al. Clinical validation of high-resolution fast spin-echo MR colonography after colon distention with air. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 22: 400–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lomas DJ, Sood RR, Graves MJ, Miller R, Hall NR, Dixon AK. Colon carcinoma: MR imaging with CO2 enema: pilot study. Radiology 2001; 219: 558–62
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ristvedt SL, McFarland EG, Weinstock LB, Thyssen EP. Patient preferences for CT colonography, conventional colonoscopy, and bowel preparation. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98: 578–85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svensson MH, Svensson E, Lasson A, Hellstrom M. Patient acceptance of CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy: prospective comparative study in patients with or suspected of having colorectal disease. Radiology 2002; 222: 337–45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinner S, Kuehle CA, Langhorst J, Ladd SC, Nuefer M, Zoepf T, et al. MR colonography vs. optical colonoscopy: comparison of patients’ acceptance in a screening population. Eur Radiol 2007; 17: 2286–93
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hartmann D, Bassler B, Pfeifer B, Eickhoff A, Weickert U, Riemann JF, et al. Patient acceptance of magnetic resonance colonography: a prospective inquiry for comparison to conventional colonoscopy. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2006; 131: 2519–23
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Langhorst J, Kuhle CA, Ajaj W, Nufer M, Barkhausen J, Michalsen A, et al. MR colonography without bowel purgation for the assessment of inflammatory bowel diseases: diagnostic accuracy and patient acceptance. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2007; 13: 1001–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goehde SC, Descher E, Boekstegers A, Lauenstein T, Kuhle C, Ruehm SG, et al. Dark lumen MR colonography based on fecal tagging for detection of colorectal masses: accuracy and patient acceptance. Abdom Imaging 2005; 30: 576–83
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pappalardo G, Polettini E, Frattaroli FM, Casciani E, D'Orta C, D'Amato M, et al. Magnetic resonance colonography versus conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colonic endoluminal lesions. Gastroenterology 2000; 119: 300–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luboldt W, Bauerfeind P, Wildermuth S, Marincek B, Fried M, Debatin JF. Colonic masses: detection with MR colonography. Radiology 2000; 216: 383–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerker J, Albes G, Roer N, Montag M, Budde T, Schaefer A. MR-colonography in hospitalized patients: feasibility and sensitivity. Z Gastroenterol 2008; 46: 339–43
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rodriguez GS, Pages LM, Castells GA, De Juan GC, Bordas Alsina JM, Rimola GJ, et al. Dark-lumen MR colonography with fecal tagging: a comparison of water enema and air methods of colonic distension for detecting colonic neoplasms. Eur Radiol 2008; 18: 1396–405
   PubMedGoogle Scholar