Original Article
A Comparison of Virtual and Conventional Colonoscopy for the Detection of Colorectal Polyps
N Engl J Med 1999; 341:1496-1503November 11, 1999
- Abstract
Background
Virtual colonoscopy is a new method of imaging the colon in which thin-section, helical computed tomography (CT) is used to generate high-resolution, two-dimensional axial images. Three-dimensional images of the colon simulating those obtained with conventional colonoscopy are then reconstructed off-line. We compared the performance of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps.
Methods
We prospectively studied 100 patients at high risk for colorectal neoplasia (60 men and 40 women; mean age, 62 years). We performed virtual colonoscopy immediately before conventional colonoscopy. We inserted a rectal tube and insufflated the colon with air to the maximal level that the patient could tolerate. We administered 1 mg of glucagon intravenously immediately before CT scanning to minimize the degree of smooth-muscle spasm and peristalsis and to reduce the patient's discomfort.
Results
The entire colon was clearly seen by virtual colonoscopy in 87 patients and by convention-al colonoscopy in 89. Fifty-one patients had normal findings on conventional colonoscopy. In the other 49, we identified a total of 115 polyps and 3 carcinomas. Virtual colonoscopy identified all 3 cancers, 20 of 22 polyps that were 10 mm or more in diameter (91 percent), 33 of 40 that were 6 to 9 mm (82 percent), and 29 of 53 that were 5 mm or smaller (55 percent). There were 19 false positive findings of polyps and no false positive findings of cancer. Of the 69 adenomatous polyps, 46 of the 51 that were 6 mm or more in diameter (90 percent) and 12 of the 18 that were 5 mm or smaller (67 percent) were correctly identified by virtual colonoscopy. Although discomfort was not specifically recorded, none of the patients requested that virtual colonoscopy be stopped because of discomfort or pain.
Conclusions
In patients at high risk for colorectal neoplasia, virtual and conventional colonoscopy have similar efficacy for the detection of polyps 6 mm or more in diameter.
Media in This Article
Figure 3
False Negative Finding on Virtual Colonoscopy.Figure 1
Colorectal Polyp in the Sigmoid Colon.Article Activity
- Article
Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. A total of approximately 129,000 new cases of carcinoma of the colon will be diagnosed in 1999, and 56,600 patients will die of the disease.1 Screening and surveillance are cost-effective strategies for reducing both the incidence of and mortality due to colorectal cancer.2-6 To date, however, implementation of these procedures has been limited, partly because of the lack of an optimal screening strategy that is safe and acceptable to patients and that provides high diagnostic accuracy at low cost.
Virtual colonoscopy is a new method of imaging the colon in which thin-section, helical computed tomography (CT) is used to generate high-resolution, two-dimensional axial images. Three-dimensional images of the colon, simulating those obtained with conventional colonoscopy, are then reconstructed off-line.7-27 Studies suggest that this technique may be an attractive alternative to existing screening tests for colorectal cancer, since it is relatively safe and minimally invasive. The diagnostic accuracy of virtual colonoscopy remains unknown. We conducted a prospective study of the diagnostic performance of virtual colonoscopy, as compared with conventional colonoscopy performed on the same day, in a group of patients at high risk for colorectal neoplasia.
Methods
Study Group
Between March 1997 and January 1999, we recruited 100 patients at high risk for colorectal neoplasia (60 men and 40 women; mean age, 62 years; range, 50 to 77 years). Patients were considered to be at high risk if they were 50 years of age or older and if they had a history of adenomatous polyps, recent sigmoidoscopic evidence of one or more polyps, a positive finding on fecal occult-blood testing, or a history of colorectal cancer in one or more first-degree relatives. Exclusion criteria were clinical or radiologic evidence of large-bowel obstruction or ischemia; colonic biopsy or polypectomy within the previous 14 days; retained barium on a scout film; colostomy; a known allergy to glucagon; known glucagonoma, insulinoma, or pheochromocytoma; and pregnancy. Logistical constraints (e.g., scheduling conflicts) and the availability of endoscopy without the requirement of a prior consultation precluded the use of a consecutive-enrollment scheme. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of the Boston Medical Center, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
Technique
The patients underwent bowel preparation with either 4 liters of a polyethylene glycol–electrolyte solution or a 48-hour liquid diet combined with two 8-oz (240-ml) doses of magnesium citrate, after which a commercially available bisacodyl and sodium phosphate enema was administered. All virtual colonoscopic examinations were performed immediately before conventional colonoscopy.
Virtual colonoscopic examinations were performed according to a previously described protocol.13,21-25 A rectal tube was inserted, and the colon was gently insufflated with room air to the maximal level tolerated by the patient. One milligram of glucagon was given immediately before helical CT imaging of the abdomen and pelvis in order to minimize the degree of smooth-muscle spasm and peristalsis and to reduce discomfort. A standard CT scout film of the abdomen and pelvis was acquired to assess the degree of colonic distention, and additional air was insufflated as required.
All CT examinations were performed with the use of a helical CT scanner (model PQ-5000, Picker International, Cleveland). Images were acquired with the use of 5-mm collimation, a table speed of 6.25 mm per second at 110 mA and 110 kV, and a matrix of 512 by 512. Images were obtained during a single breath-holding session when possible in order to visualize the entire colon. Images were reconstructed at 2-mm intervals, with a 3-mm slice overlap. The procedure was first performed with the patient in the supine position and then repeated with the patient in the prone position.
The CT data were downloaded to a workstation (Voxel Q, Picker International) equipped with software for three-dimensional rendering (epi-Scope 3.4 and Voyager 3.4, Picker International). Using this software, a single radiologist, who was unaware of the results of conventional colonoscopy, generated both antegrade and retrograde endoluminal virtual endoscopic navigations of the colon.
Interpretation
The axial two-dimensional CT images and endoluminal three-dimensional reconstructions were reviewed by two experienced gastrointestinal radiologists who were unaware of the results of conventional colonoscopy and all previous evaluations, including flexible sigmoidoscopy. Axial CT images, obtained with the patient lying both supine and prone, were viewed at a window level of –1000 Hounsfield units and a window width of 500 Hounsfield units. The endoluminal images were reviewed on a 17-in. (43-cm) monitor (Voxel Q) at a rate of 5 to 30 frames per second. Final interpretations were based on a combined evaluation of the axial CT images and the endoluminal images. The radiologists reviewed the studies jointly and arrived at a consensus.
Conventional Colonoscopy
Conventional colonoscopy was performed by an experienced gastroenterologist immediately after virtual colonoscopy, with the use of a standard endoscope (model CFQ-140L, Olympus, Lake Success, N.Y.). The endoscopists were not aware of the results of virtual colonoscopy. In cases in which the conventional colonoscopic examination was incomplete, the endoscopist's best estimate of the depth of inspection was recorded. The location of each lesion was documented, and the size was measured by comparison with an open biopsy forceps.28
Statistical Analysis
We regarded the results of conventional colonoscopy as the gold standard against which the results of virtual colonoscopy were compared. The results of virtual colonoscopy were analyzed on a per-polyp basis. Analysis included an evaluation of the agreement between the two methods of colonoscopy with respect to both the size and the location of the polyp. For the purpose of determining location, the colon was divided into six segments: rectum, sigmoid colon, descending colon, transverse colon, ascending colon, and cecum. For a true positive result, the lesion identified on virtual colonoscopy had to have been matched according to location, size, and morphologic features to a lesion found on conventional colonoscopy. In the per-patient evaluation, a result was considered to be truly positive only when at least one polyp identified on virtual colonoscopy was matched to a lesion seen on conventional colonoscopy. All other results were considered to be false positive. The chi-square test was used to determine significant differences.
Results
Conventional Colonoscopy
Of the 100 patients, 51 had normal findings on conventional colonoscopy. A total of 115 polyps and 3 carcinomas were identified in 49 patients. Fifty-three of the 115 polyps (46 percent) were 1 to 5 mm in diameter, 40 (35 percent) were 6 to 9 mm, and 22 (19 percent) were 10 mm or larger. Of the 115 polyps identified, 101 (88 percent) were successfully removed and examined histologically; 69 were adenomatous and 32 were hyperplastic. Hyperplastic polyps (32 percent of the polyps retrieved) tended to be smaller than adenomatous polyps (P=0.001) and were predominantly on the left side of the colon, whereas adenomatous polyps were more evenly distributed (P=0.02) (Table 1Table 1
Histologic Classification of 101 Retrieved Polyps According to Size and Location.). All three of the adenocarcinomas were sessile; one was located in the sigmoid colon (35 mm), one in the transverse colon (25 mm), and one in the cecum (25 mm).Eighty-nine percent of the conventional colonoscopic examinations were complete, with visualization to the cecum. Reasons for incomplete colonoscopy included inadequate bowel preparation, tortuosity, and lack of cooperation on the part of the patient. The only documented complication of conventional colonoscopy was a perforation of the sigmoid colon in a patient with sigmoid diverticular disease. This patient was admitted to the hospital for observation but did not require surgery.
Virtual Colonoscopy
Table 2Table 2
Results of Virtual Colonoscopy as Compared with Conventional Colonoscopy, According to Polyp Size and Histologic Type. shows the performance of virtual colonoscopy for the detection of polyps, according to size and histologic type. Eighty-two of the 115 polyps (71 percent) seen on conventional colonoscopy were correctly identified on the basis of location and size. An example is shown in Figure 1Figure 1Colorectal Polyp in the Sigmoid Colon.. The sensitivity of virtual colonoscopy was related to the size of the polyp. Only 29 of 53 polyps between 1 and 5 mm in diameter (55 percent) were correctly identified on virtual colonoscopy. The sensitivity for the detection of polyps that were 6 to 9 mm and those that were 10 mm or larger was significantly higher (82 percent and 91 percent, respectively; P=0.001). The performance of virtual colonoscopy was also related to histologic type. The sensitivity of virtual colonoscopy for the detection of hyperplastic polyps 1 to 5 mm in diameter was significantly lower than that for the detection of adenomatous polyps of the same size (48 percent vs. 67 percent, P=0.003). The sensitivity of virtual colonoscopy was 71 percent for the detection of hyperplastic polyps 6 to 9 mm in diameter and 90 percent for adenomatous polyps of the same size. All three cancers were identified on virtual colonoscopy; an example is shown in Figure 2Figure 2
Cecal Carcinoma and Polyp..There were 19 false positive findings of polyps on virtual colonoscopy; 9 were 1 to 5 mm in diameter, 8 were 6 to 9 mm, and 2 were 10 mm or more (Table 2). Nine of the false positive findings were in segments of colon containing residual solid stool, and eight were in segments of colon (particularly the sigmoid colon) with diverticular disease and poor distention, where thickened and complex haustral folds were misinterpreted as polyps; the other two were in clean, well-distended areas of colon. There were no false positive reports of cancer on virtual colonoscopy.
Of the 33 polyps that were not detected on virtual colonoscopy, 24 (73 percent) were between 1 and 5 mm in diameter. Retrospective analysis of the images did not result in the identification of many of these polyps, despite adequate distention and preparation of the colon. Limited image resolution probably accounts for most of these false negative results. False negative results for the seven polyps that were 6 to 9 mm in diameter and the two that were 10 mm or larger were due to the misinterpretation of polyps as stool (two polyps) or as folds (three) or to inadequate visualization because of retained intraluminal fluid and poor colonic distention (four). Of the two false negative results involving polyps that were 10 mm or more in diameter, one was due to inadequate distention of the sigmoid colon, and the other was due to an error in interpretation. The latter polyp, a 25-mm mass located in the proximal sigmoid colon, was the largest polyp missed (Figure 3Figure 3
False Negative Finding on Virtual Colonoscopy.). Although the mass was identified on virtual colonoscopy, the dramatic difference in its position on the two films obtained with the patient in the prone and supine positions was interpreted as indicating the presence of stool rather than a polyp on a very long stalk.When the results of virtual colonoscopy were analyzed on a per-patient basis, the performance was improved. If the detection of polyps of all sizes was regarded as important, the results of 42 virtual colonoscopic examinations would have been classified as true positive results, 41 as true negative results, 8 as false positive results, and 9 as false negative results. Therefore, when polyps of all sizes were included, the per-patient sensitivity of virtual colonoscopy was 82 percent, and the specificity was 84 percent. The positive and negative predictive values were 82 and 84 percent, respectively. The per-patient performance improved as the size of the polyps increased; virtual colonoscopy had a sensitivity of 94 percent and a specificity of 92 percent for the detection of polyps between 6 and 9 mm in diameter, with positive and negative predictive values of 92 and 94 percent, respectively. At 10 mm, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for virtual colonoscopy were each 96 percent. It should be noted that in the per-patient analysis, only lesions that had been matched with polyps seen on conventional colonoscopy were regarded as true positive findings.
The entire colon was clearly seen on virtual colonoscopy in 87 of the 100 patients, as compared with 89 on conventional colonoscopy. In 13 patients, virtual colonoscopic evaluation was incomplete because of a combination of inadequate distention of the colon and retained intraluminal fluid or stool. On average, the time required for virtual colonoscopy was just under 20 minutes for CT scanning, 30 minutes for image manipulation, and 10 minutes for interpretation.
Air insufflation was performed to the maximal level tolerated by the patient. Although discomfort was not specifically recorded, none of the patients requested that the procedure be stopped because of discomfort or pain. The patients who reported discomfort described it as mild bloating or cramping. After the injection of intravenous glucagon, several patients reported nausea.
Discussion
Since its description in 1994,7 virtual colonoscopy has emerged as a promising method of colorectal evaluation. Although investigators have used a variety of terms and scanning techniques,7-12,16-18,22-26 the same basic imaging principles apply: thin-section, helical CT of the air-distended, clean colon, with interpretation of data based on both axial two-dimensional images of the colonic mucosa and computer-generated, three-dimensional, reconstructed images. This technique has been evaluated in in vitro studies,10,11,16,17 in studies of patients with proven carcinoma of the colon,21,24,25 and in studies of small numbers of patients with colorectal polyps.8,16 Data from these preliminary studies suggested a sensitivity of more than 75 percent and a specificity of more than 90 percent for large colorectal polyps (those more than 10 mm in diameter) and cancers. These studies also demonstrated several technical advantages of virtual colonoscopy over conventional colonoscopy, including visualization of the colon next to an obstructing lesion24 and ease of inspection of both antegrade and retrograde sides of haustral folds, resulting in the identification of large lesions missed on endoscopy.25
As expected, the performance of virtual colonoscopy was highly dependent on the size of the lesion. As demonstrated in the in vitro models, the threshold for the reliable detection of small lesions was approximately 5 mm.15,17 However, the rate of detection of larger polyps, and adenomatous polyps in particular, was much better and approached the reported rate for the detection of adenomatous polyps 6 mm or larger by conventional colonoscopy.29 The lower sensitivity for the detection of hyperplastic polyps may reflect the tendency of these polyps to be effaced when the colon is distended with air.30
Care must be taken in reporting false positive results with virtual colonoscopy. Although conventional colonoscopy was used as the gold standard in this study, between 10 and 20 percent of colonic polyps and up to 5 percent of colorectal cancers may be missed on conventional colonoscopy.29,31-33 We have found that virtual colonoscopy can identify large colonic polyps (adenomas of 5 mm or larger) not seen on initial conventional colonoscopy. Consequently, it is possible that the true specificity and positive predictive value of virtual colonoscopy are higher than those reported here.
As a means of detecting colonic polyps and as a potential screening tool, virtual colonoscopy must be measured against other diagnostic approaches, including fecal occult-blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, and double-contrast barium enema. Because it allows for direct visualization of the entire colon, virtual colonoscopy has advantages over both fecal occult-blood testing2-4,34-37 and sigmoidoscopy.38,39 In the only direct comparison to date, virtual colonoscopy was more sensitive than single-contrast barium enema for the detection of polyps.11 Our data also suggest that virtual colonoscopy is superior to double-contrast barium enema, which has a reported sensitivity of 65 to 75 percent for the detection of polyps larger than 7 mm in patients undergoing surveillance examinations because of a history of colorectal adenomas.40,41 Furthermore, the results of double-contrast barium enema are highly dependent on the skill of the operator.42,43 Improvements in the means of acquisition of CT data (multidetector systems) and in software are likely to improve the results of virtual colonoscopy and their reproducibility, in terms of both the quality of the images and the interpretation of the data. Together, these improvements may reduce the cost of the procedure by decreasing the amount of time required for both scanning and three-dimensional reconstruction.
Virtual colonoscopy is relatively simple and is less invasive than conventional colonoscopy. Although full preparation of the colon is required, the procedure takes considerably less time than conventional colonoscopy and does not require sedation. Most patients experience some abdominal discomfort as a result of air insufflation, but the examination may be more acceptable to patients than conventional colonoscopy.13,44
An important question is whether the low rate of sensitivity for the detection of polyps between 1 and 5 mm in diameter is acceptable. There is controversy about what constitutes a clinically significant polyp with regard to size.45-47 Although many would argue for the removal of all adenomatous polyps, whatever their size, the prevalence of polyps less than 10 mm in diameter in people over 50 years of age is high (30 to 50 percent).3,48 Removal of all such polyps for the prevention of colorectal carcinoma would be a formidable challenge. Moreover, in the subgroup of patients with adenomatous polyps that are 10 mm or smaller, the probability of cancer is low, and the likelihood of any single lesion progressing to cancer is also small.49 On the basis of these data, Glick et al.50 have suggested that a policy of identifying and removing only polyps above a specific threshold for size, as opposed to a policy of universal polypectomy, could result in a similar reduction in mortality but at lower risk and lower cost.
Our study has several limitations. First, the diagnostic accuracy of virtual colonoscopy in this study of high-risk patients may be an overestimation of its performance in persons with average risk. Hence the validity of this technique as a screening test needs to be confirmed. Second, our highly selective patient-recruitment scheme precluded a meaningful assessment of whether patients will find virtual colonoscopy acceptable. Similarly, our study design did not allow us to compare virtual colonoscopy and conventional colonoscopy with respect to tolerance of the procedure, side effects, patients' preference, or cost. Furthermore, we did not address the reproducibility of our results in terms of variability between observers and between centers. Further studies are needed to address each of these limitations before widespread use of virtual colonoscopy can be recommended.
Supported in part by a grant from the Research and Education Fund of the Radiological Society of North America.
Source Information
From the Departments of Radiology (H.M.F., M.A.B., P.D.C., J.T.F.) and Gastroenterology (D.P.N., P.C.S.), Boston University School of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston.
Address reprint requests to Dr. Barish at the Department of Radiology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA 02118, or at mbarish@virtualcolonoscopy.net.
- References
References
1
Cancer facts & figures — 1999. Atlanta: American Cancer Society, 1999.
2
Mandel JS ,Bond JH ,Church TR , et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. N Engl J Med 1993;328:1365-1371[Erratum, N Engl J Med 1993;329:672.]
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline3
Hardcastle JD ,Chamberlain JO ,Robinson MH , et al. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet 1996;348:1472-1477
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline4
Kronborg O ,Fenger C ,Olsen J ,Jorgensen OD ,Sondergaard O . Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet 1996;348:1467-1471
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline5
Selby JV ,Friedman GD ,Quesenberry CP Jr ,Weiss NS . A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 1992;326:653-657
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline6
Newcomb PA ,Norfleet RG ,Storer BE ,Surawicz TS ,Marcus PM . Screening sigmoidoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992;84:1572-1575
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline7
Vining DJ ,Gelfand DW ,Bechtold RE ,Scharling ES ,Grishaw EK ,Shifrin RY . Technical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994;162:Suppl:104-104 abstract.8
Hara AK ,Johnson CD ,Reed JE , et al. Detection of colorectal polyps with CT colography: initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity. Radiology 1997;205:59-65
Web of Science | Medline9
Hara AK ,Johnson CD ,Reed JE , et al. Detection of colorectal polyps by computed tomographic colography: feasibility of a novel technique. Gastroenterology 1996;110:284-290
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline10
Hara AK ,Johnson CD ,Reed JE ,Ehman RL ,Ilstrup DM . Colorectal polyp detection with CT colography: two- versus three-dimensional techniques: work in progress. Radiology 1996;200:49-54
Web of Science | Medline11
Hara AK ,Johnson CD ,Reed JE ,Ahlquist DA ,Nelson H ,Harmsen WS . Computed tomographic colography (virtual colonoscopy) for polyp detection: early comparison against barium enema. Gastroenterology 1997;112:Suppl:A575-A575 abstract.
CrossRef | Web of Science12
Hara AK ,Johnson CD ,Reed JE , et al. Reducing data size and radiation dose for CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;168:1181-1184
Web of Science | Medline13
Johnson CD ,Ahlquist DA . Computed tomography colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a new method for colorectal screening. Gut 1999;44:301-305
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline14
Ahlquist DA ,Hara AK ,Johnson CD . Computed tomographic colography and virtual colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 1997;7:439-452
Medline15
Dachman AH ,Lieberman J ,Osnis RB , et al. Small simulated polyps in pig colon: sensitivity of CT virtual colography. Radiology 1997;203:427-430
Web of Science | Medline16
Dachman AH ,Kuniyoshi JK ,Boyle CM , et al. CT colonography with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171:989-995
Web of Science | Medline17
Beaulieu CF ,Napel S ,Daniel BL , et al. Detection of colonic polyps in a phantom model: implications for virtual colonoscopy data acquisition. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1998;22:656-663
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline18
Rubin GD ,Beaulieu CF ,Argiro V , et al. Perspective volume rendering of CT and MR images: applications for endoscopic imaging. Radiology 1996;199:321-330
Web of Science | Medline19
Vining DJ . Virtual endoscopy: is it reality? Radiology 1996;200:30-31
Web of Science | Medline20
Fenlon HM ,Ferrucci JT . Virtual colonoscopy: what will the issues be? AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;169:453-458
Web of Science | Medline21
Royster AP ,Fenlon HM ,Clarke PD ,Nunes DP ,Ferrucci JT . CT colonoscopy of colorectal neoplasms: two-dimensional and three-dimensional virtual-reality techniques with colonoscopic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;169:1237-1242
Web of Science | Medline22
Fenlon HM ,Clarke PD ,Ferrucci JT . Virtual colonoscopy: imaging features with colonoscopic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;170:1303-1309
Web of Science | Medline23
Royster AP ,Gupta AK ,Fenlon HM ,Ferrucci JT . Virtual colonoscopy: current status and future implications. Acad Radiol 1998;5:282-288
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline24
Fenlon HM ,McAneny DB ,Nunes DP ,Clarke PD ,Ferrucci JT . Occlusive colon carcinoma: virtual colonoscopy in the preoperative evaluation of the proximal colon. Radiology 1999;210:423-428
Web of Science | Medline25
Fenlon HM ,Nunes DP ,Clarke PD ,Ferrucci JT . Colorectal neoplasm detection using virtual colonoscopy: a feasibility study. Gut 1998;43:806-811
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline26
Vining DJ . Virtual colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 1997;7:285-291
Medline27
Johnson CD ,Hara AK ,Reed JE . Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a new method for detecting colorectal neoplasms. Endoscopy 1997;29:454-461
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline28
Morales TG ,Sampliner RE ,Garewal HS ,Fennerty MB ,Aickin M . The difference in colon polyp size before and after removal. Gastrointest Endosc 1996;43:25-28
Web of Science | Medline29
Rex DK ,Cutler CS ,Lemmel GT , et al. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997;112:24-28
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline30
Bertoni G ,Sassatelli R ,Conigliaro R , et al. Visual “disappearing phenomenon“ can reliably predict the nonadenomatous nature of rectal and rectosigmoid diminutive polyps at endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 1994;40:588-591
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline31
Winawer SJ ,Zauber AG ,Ho MN , et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. N Engl J Med 1993;329:1977-1981
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline32
Hixson LJ ,Fennerty MB ,Sampliner RE ,McGee D ,Garewal H . Prospective study of the frequency and size distribution of polyps missed by colonoscopy. J Natl Cancer Inst 1990;82:1769-1772
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline33
Hixson LJ ,Fennerty MB ,Sampliner RE ,Garewal HS . Prospective blinded trial of the colonoscopic miss-rate of large colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 1991;37:125-127
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline34
Williams CB ,Hunt RH ,Loose H ,Riddell RH ,Sakai Y ,Swarbrick ET . Colonoscopy in the management of colon polyps. Br J Surg 1974;61:673-682
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline35
Steine S ,Stordahl A ,Lunde OC ,Loken K ,Laerum E . Double-contrast barium enema versus colonoscopy in the diagnosis of neoplastic disorders: aspects of decision-making in general practice. Fam Pract 1993;10:288-291
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline36
Fork FT . Reliability of routine double contrast examination of the large bowel: a prospective study of 2590 patients. Gut 1983;24:672-677
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline37
Brady AP ,Stevenson GW ,Stevenson I . Colorectal cancer overlooked at barium enema examination and colonoscopy: a continuing perceptual problem. Radiology 1994;192:373-378
Web of Science | Medline38
Winawer SJ ,Flehinger BJ ,Schottenfeld D ,Miller DG . Screening for colorectal cancer with fecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:1311-1318
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline39
Lang CA ,Ransohoff DF . Fecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer: is mortality reduced by chance selection for screening colonoscopy? JAMA 1994;271:1011-1013
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline40
Reilly JM ,Ballantyne GH ,Fleming FX ,Zucker KA ,Modlin IM . Evaluation of the occult blood test in screening for colorectal neoplasms: a prospective study using flexible endoscopy. Am Surg 1990;56:119-123
Web of Science | Medline41
Ahlquist DA ,McGill DB ,Fleming JL , et al. Patterns of occult bleeding in asymptomatic colorectal cancer. Cancer 1989;63:1826-1830
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline42
Granqvist S . Distribution of polyps in the large bowel in relation to age: a colonoscopic study. Scand J Gastroenterol 1981;16:1025-1031
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline43
Appel MF . Distribution of malignant polyps in the colon. Dis Colon Rectum 1982;25:427-428
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline44
Hara A, Johnson CD, Reed JE, et al. Colorectal polyp detection using CT colography: initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity. Presented at the 82nd Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting of the Radiological Society of North America, Chicago, December 1–6, 1996. abstract.
45
Stryker SJ ,Wolff BG ,Culp CE ,Libbe SD ,Ilstrup DM ,MacCarty RL . Natural history of untreated colonic polyps. Gastroenterology 1987;93:1009-1013
Web of Science | Medline46
Waye JD ,Lewis BS ,Frankel A ,Geller SA . Small colon polyps. Am J Gastroenterol 1988;83:120-122
Web of Science | Medline47
Nusko G ,Mansmann U ,Partzsch U , et al. Invasive carcinoma in colorectal adenomas: multivariate analysis of patient and adenoma characteristics. Endoscopy 1997;29:626-631
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline48
Rex DK . Colonoscopy: a review of its yield for cancers and adenomas by indication. Am J Gastroenterol 1995;90:353-365
Web of Science | Medline49
Winawer SJ ,Fletcher RH ,Miller L , et al. Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology 1997;112:594-642[Erratum, Gastroenterology 1997;112:1060, 1998;114:625.]
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline50
Glick S ,Wagner JL ,Johnson CD . Cost-effectiveness of double-contrast barium enema in screening for colorectal cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;170:629-636
Web of Science | Medline
- Citing Articles (236)
Citing Articles
1
Agata Rembielak, Melanie Green, Azeem Saleem, Pat Price. (2011) Diagnostic and therapeutic imaging in oncology. Medicine 39:12, 693-697
CrossRef2
Toshiyuki Yoshikawa, Yasuo Takehara, Masataka Kikuyama, Ken Takeuchi, Hiroyuki Hanai. (2011) Computed tomographic enteroclysis with air and virtual enteroscopy: Protocol and feasibility for small bowel evaluation. Digestive and Liver Disease
CrossRef3
Xiaohui Wei, Jiong Zhu, Hongxia Gong, Jianrong Xu, Yuhong Xu. (2011) A novel foam fluid negative contrast medium for clear visualization of the colon wall in CT imaging. Contrast Media & Molecular Imaging 6:6, 465-473
CrossRef4
, Christian Wagner, Samuel Smith, Steve Halligan, Alex Ghanouni, Emily Power, Richard J. Lilford, Dion Morton, Edward Dadswell, Wendy Atkin, Jane Wardle. (2011) Patient acceptability of CT colonography compared with double contrast barium enema: results from a multicentre randomised controlled trial of symptomatic patients. European Radiology 21:10, 2046-2055
CrossRef5
Brian D. Nicholson, Rachel Hyland, Bjorn J. Rembacken, Mark Denyer, Mark A. Hull, Damian J. M. Tolan. (2011) Colonoscopy for colonic wall thickening at computed tomography: a worthwhile pursuit?. Surgical Endoscopy 25:8, 2586-2591
CrossRef6
Abhilash Alexander Miranda, Olivier Caelen, Gianluca Bontempi. 2011. Machine Learning for Automated Polyp Detection in Computed Tomography Colonography. , 830-850.
CrossRef7
J. S. Khan, B. J. Moran. (2011) Iatrogenic perforation at colonic imaging. Colorectal Disease 13:5, 481-493
CrossRef8
Stefanie Weinstein, Rizwan Aslam, Judy Yee. (2011) Evolution of CT colonography. Imaging in Medicine 3:1, 67-80
CrossRef9
Holger R. Roth, Jamie R. McClelland, Darren J. Boone, Marc Modat, M. Jorge Cardoso, Thomas E. Hampshire, Mingxing Hu, Shonit Punwani, Sebastien Ourselin, Greg G. Slabaugh, Steve Halligan, David J. Hawkes. (2011) Registration of the endoluminal surfaces of the colon derived from prone and supine CT colonography. Medical Physics 38:6, 3077
CrossRef10
Emanuele Neri, Paola Vagli, Francesca Turini, Francesca Cerri, Lorenzo Faggioni, Simone Angeli, Lorenzo Cini, Carlo Bartolozzi. (2010) Post-surgical follow-up of colorectal cancer: role of contrast-enhanced CT colonography. Abdominal Imaging 35:6, 669-675
CrossRef11
Aoife N. Keeling, Martina M. Morrin, Charles McKenzie, Richard J. Farrell, Sunil G. Sheth, Long Ngo, B. Nicolas Bloch, Ivan Pedrosa, Neil M. Rofsky. (2010) Intravenous, contrast-enhanced MR colonography using air as endoluminal contrast agent: Impact on colorectal polyp detection. European Journal of Radiology
CrossRef12
Brooks D Cash. (2010) CT Colonography: Ready for Prime Time?. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 105:10, 2128-2132
CrossRef13
Małgorzata Rudzińska, Janusz Rudziński, Robert Szyca, Krzysztof Leksowski. (2010) Computed Tomography colonography in Preoperative Evaluation of colorectal cancer. Polish Journal of Surgery 82:8, 449-453
CrossRef14
Hee Sun Park, Se Hyung Kim, Jong Hyo Kim, June-Goo Lee, Sang Gyun Kim, Jeong Min Lee, Jae Young Lee, Joon Koo Han, Byung Ihn Choi. (2010) Computer-aided polyp detection on CT colonography: Comparison of three systems in a high-risk human population. European Journal of Radiology 75:2, e147-e157
CrossRef15
Noriko Suzuki, Ana Ignjatovic, David Burling, Stuart A. Taylor. (2010) CT Colonography and Non-Polypoid Colorectal Neoplasms. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America 20:3, 565-572
CrossRef16
Gerard Gay, Michel Delvaux, Muriel Frederic, Isaac Fassler. (2010) Could the Colonic Capsule PillCam Colon Be Clinically Useful for Selecting Patients Who Deserve a Complete Colonoscopy?: Results of Clinical Comparison With Colonoscopy in the Perspective of Colorectal Cancer Screening. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 105:5, 1076-1086
CrossRef17
Peter D. Poullos, Christopher F. Beaulieu. (2010) Current Techniques in the Performance, Interpretation, and Reporting of CT Colonography. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America 20:2, 169-192
CrossRef18
Daniele Regge, Giovanni Galatola, Cristiana Laudi, Gabriella Iussich. (2010) Role of CT colonography in screening programs. Imaging in Medicine 2:2, 181-194
CrossRef19
Perry J. Pickhardt, David H. Kim. (2010) Performance of CT Colonography for Detecting Small, Diminutive, and Flat Polyps. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America 20:2, 209-226
CrossRef20
Lewis K. Shin, Peter Poullos, R. Brooke Jeffrey. (2010) MR Colonography and MR Enterography. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America 20:2, 323-346
CrossRef21
PERRY J. PICKHARDT, DAVID H. KIM. 2010. Polyp Detection at CTC. , 183-195.
CrossRef22
PERRY J. PICKHARDT. 2010. CT Colonography. , 53-59.
CrossRef23
DAVID H. KIM, PERRY J. PICKHARDT. 2010. Clinical Validation of CTC Performance. , 60-67.
CrossRef24
Kenji Suzuki, Don C. Rockey, Abraham H. Dachman. (2010) CT colonography: Advanced computer-aided detection scheme utilizing MTANNs for detection of “missed” polyps in a multicenter clinical trial. Medical Physics 37:1, 12
CrossRef25
Elizabeth G. McFarland, Joel G. Fletcher, Perry Pickhardt, Abraham Dachman, Judy Yee, Cynthia H. McCollough, Michael Macari, Paul Knechtges, Michael Zalis, Matthew Barish, David H. Kim, Kathryn J. Keysor, C. Daniel Johnson. (2009) ACR Colon Cancer Committee White Paper: Status of CT Colonography 2009. Journal of the American College of Radiology 6:11, 756-772.e4
CrossRef26
Ifeyinwa A. Stitt, Michael P. Stany, Richard P. Moser, G. Scott Rose, Susan G. Dunlow. (2009) Incidental gynecological findings on computed tomographic colonography: Prevalence and outcomes. Gynecologic Oncology 115:1, 138-141
CrossRef27
Soon Ho Yoon, Se Hyung Kim, Sang Gyun Kim, Soo Jin Kim, Jeong Min Lee, Jae Young Lee, Joon Koo Han, Byung Ihn Choi. (2009) Comparison Study of Different Bowel Preparation Regimens and Different Fecal-Tagging Agents on Tagging Efficacy, Patients' Compliance, and Diagnostic Performance of Computed Tomographic Colonography. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 33:5, 657-665
CrossRef28
Don C. Rockey. (2009) Computed Tomographic Colonography: Current Perspectives and Future Directions. Gastroenterology 137:1, 7-14
CrossRef29
Yu-xiong Su, Shi-ting Feng, Gui-qing Liao, Yun-qi Zhong, Hai-chao Liu, Guang-sen Zheng. (2009) CT virtual sialendoscopy versus conventional sialendoscopy in the visualization of salivary ductal lumen: An in vitro study. The Laryngoscope 119:7, 1339-1343
CrossRef30
T. J. White, G. R. Avery, N. Kennan, A. M. Syed, J. E. Hartley, J. R. T. Monson. (2009) Virtual colonoscopy vs conventional colonoscopy in patients at high risk of colorectal cancer - a prospective trial of 150 patients. Colorectal Disease 11:2, 138-145
CrossRef31
James R. Kimberly, Kim C. Phillips, Pete Santago, James Perumpillichira, Robert Bechtold, Benoit Pineau, David Vining, Richard S. Bloomfeld. (2009) Extracolonic Findings at Virtual Colonoscopy: An Important Consideration in Asymptomatic Colorectal Cancer Screening. Journal of General Internal Medicine 24:1, 69-73
CrossRef32
Judy Yee. (2009) CT Colonography: Techniques and Applications. Radiologic Clinics of North America 47:1, 133-145
CrossRef33
Daniel Cornett, Courtney Barancin, Brent Roeder, Mark Reichelderfer, Terrance Frick, Deepak Gopal, David Kim, Perry J. Pickhardt, Andrew Taylor, Patrick Pfau. (2008) Findings on Optical Colonoscopy After Positive CT Colonography Exam. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 103:8, 2068-2074
CrossRef34
Young Sun Kim, Nayoung Kim, Se Hyung Kim, Min Jung Park, Seon Hee Lim, Jeong Yoon Yim, Kyung Ran Cho, Sun Sin Kim, Dong Hee Kim, Hyo Won Eun, Kyoung Soo Cho, Jeong Hoon Kim, Byung Inhn Choi, Hyun Chae Jung, In Sung Song, Chan Soo Shin, Sang-Heon Cho, Byung-Hee Oh. (2008) The Efficacy of Intravenous Contrast-enhanced 16-raw Multidetector CT Colonography for Detecting Patients With Colorectal Polyps in an Asymptomatic Population in Korea. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 42:7, 791-798
CrossRef35
Tsuyoshi Morimoto, Gen Iinuma, Junji Shiraishi, Yasuaki Arai, Noriyuki Moriyama, Gareth Beddoe, Yasuo Nakijima. (2008) Computer-aided detection in computed tomography colonography: current status and problems with detection of early colorectal cancer. Radiation Medicine 26:5, 261-269
CrossRef36
F.G. Bader, R. Bouchard, A. Lubienski, R. Keller, L. Mirow, R. Czymek, J.K. Habermann, H.-P. Bruch, U.J. Roblick. (2008) Fortschritte in der Diagnostik anorektaler Erkrankungen. Der Chirurg 79:5, 410-417
CrossRef37
Perry J. Pickhardt, David H. Kim. (2008) Computerized Tomography Colonography: A Primer for Gastroenterologists. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 6:5, 497-502
CrossRef38
Bernard Levin, David A. Lieberman, Beth McFarland, Kimberly S. Andrews, Durado Brooks, John Bond, Chiranjeev Dash, Francis M. Giardiello, Seth Glick, David Johnson, C. Daniel Johnson, Theodore R. Levin, Perry J. Pickhardt, Douglas K. Rex, Robert A. Smith, Alan Thorson, Sidney J. Winawer. (2008) Screening and Surveillance for the Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer and Adenomatous Polyps, 2008: A Joint Guideline From the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. Gastroenterology 134:5, 1570-1595
CrossRef39
Cheri L. Canon. (2008) Is There Still a Role for Double-Contrast Barium Enema Examination?. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 6:4, 389-392
CrossRef40
P. Sundaram, A. Zomorodian, C. Beaulieu, S. Napel. (2008) Colon polyp detection using smoothed shape operators: Preliminary results. Medical Image Analysis 12:2, 99-119
CrossRef41
T.A. Chowdhury, P.F. Whelan, O. Ghita. (2008) A Fully Automatic CAD-CTC System Based on Curvature Analysis for Standard and Low-Dose CT Data. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 55:3, 888-901
CrossRef42
Anthony B. Miller. (2008) Implementation of Colon Cancer Screening: Techniques, Costs, and Barriers. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America 37:1, 83-95
CrossRef43
Jun Yong Jeong, Min Ju Kim, Sam Soo Kim. (2008) Manual and Automated Polyp Measurement. Academic Radiology 15:2, 231-239
CrossRef44
A. Graser, T. Mang, C.R. Becker, M.F. Reiser. (2008) Indikationen und Ergebnisse der CT-Kolonographie: von der Vorsorge bis zum symptomatischen Patienten. Der Radiologe 48:2, 118-125
CrossRef45
Suraj Alva, Dan Eisenberg, Andrew Duffy, Kurt Roberts, Gary Israel, Robert Bell. (2008) A new modality to evaluate the gastric remnant after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases 4:1, 46-49
CrossRef46
Su Wang, Lihong Li, Harris Cohen, Seth Mankes, John J. Chen, Zhengrong Liang. (2008) An EM approach to MAP solution of segmenting tissue mixture percentages with application to CT-based virtual colonoscopy. Medical Physics 35:12, 5787
CrossRef47
Yasuyo Kayashima, Fumiko Kimura, Kaiji Inoue, Yukiko Honda, Tadashi Nakanishi, Katsuhide Ito. (2008) Computed tomographic air-contrast enema imaging for presurgical examination of colon tumors: assessment with colon phantoms and in patients. Radiation Medicine 26:1, 6-14
CrossRef48
P VEITHAIBACH. 2008. Potential New Staging Perspectives in Colorectal CancerWhole-Body PET/CT-Colonography. , 365-372.
CrossRef49
R IYER. 2008. Incidental Extracolonic LesionsComputed Tomography. , 339-354.
CrossRef50
Jasper Florie, Rogier E. Gelder, Michiel P. Schutter, Adrienne Randen, Henk W. Venema, Steven Jager, Victor P. M. Hulst, Anna Prent, Shandra Bipat, Patrick M. M. Bossuyt, Lubbertus C. Baak, Jaap Stoker. (2007) Feasibility study of computed tomography colonography using limited bowel preparation at normal and low-dose levels study. European Radiology 17:12, 3112-3122
CrossRef51
Álvaro Campillo-Soto, Enrique Pellicer-Franco, Elena Parlorio-Andrés, Víctor Soria-Aledo, Germán Morales-Cuenca, José Luis Aguayo-Albasini. (2007) Colonografía tomográfica computarizada frente a enema opaco en el estudio preoperatorio del cáncer colorrectal en pacientes con colonoscopia incompleta. Medicina Clínica 129:19, 725-728
CrossRef52
Sonja Kinner, Gerald Antoch, Andreas Bockisch, Patrick Veit-Haibach. (2007) Whole-body PET/CT-colonography: a possible new concept for colorectal cancer staging. Abdominal Imaging 32:5, 606-612
CrossRef53
Philippe Lefere, Abraham H. Dachman, Stefaan Gryspeerdt. (2007) Computed tomographic colonography: clinical value. Abdominal Imaging 32:5, 541-551
CrossRef54
Franco Iafrate, Marco Rengo, Riccardo Ferrari, Pasquale Paolantonio, Michela Celestre, Andrea Laghi. (2007) Spectrum of Normal Findings, Anatomic Variants and Pathology of Ileocecal Valve: CT Colonography Appearances and Endoscopic Correlation. Abdominal Imaging 32:5, 589-595
CrossRef55
Akihide Sugiyama, Yusuke Ohashi, Akira Gomi, Katsuyuki Moriya, Yutaka Sanada, Masashi Yatsuzuka, Akira Toki. (2007) Colorectal screening with single scan CT colonography in children. Pediatric Surgery International 23:10, 987-990
CrossRef56
Don C. Rockey, Matthew Barish, Joel V. Brill, Brooks D. Cash, Joel G. Fletcher, Prateek Sharma, Sachin Wani, Maurits J. Wiersema, Laura E. Peterson, Jennifer Conte. (2007) Standards for Gastroenterologists for Performing and Interpreting Diagnostic Computed Tomographic Colonography. Gastroenterology 133:3, 1005-1024
CrossRef57
María Chaparro Sánchez, Lourdes del Campo Val, José Maté Jiménez, José Cantero Perona, Antonio Barbosa, Sam Khorrami, Ricardo Moreno-Otero, Javier P. Gisbert. (2007) Computed tomography colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterología y Hepatología 30:7, 375-380
CrossRef58
Seok-Jae Jeong, Arie E. Kaufman. (2007) Interactive wireless virtual colonoscopy. The Visual Computer 23:8, 545-557
CrossRef59
KAZUTAKA YAMADA, MANABU MORIMOTO, MIORI KISHIMOTO, ERIK R. WISNER. (2007) VIRTUAL ENDOSCOPY OF DOGS USING MULTI-DETECTOR ROW CT. Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound 48:4, 318-322
CrossRef60
Revathy B. Iyer, Silvana Faria, Ronelle DuBrow. (2007) CT colonography: surveillance in patients with a history of colorectal cancer. Abdominal Imaging 32:2, 234-238
CrossRef61
Alan S. Rosman, Mark A. Korsten. (2007) Meta-analysis Comparing CT Colonography, Air Contrast Barium Enema, and Colonoscopy. The American Journal of Medicine 120:3, 203-210.e4
CrossRef62
Steve Halligan, Stuart A. Taylor. (2007) CT colonography: Results and limitations. European Journal of Radiology 61:3, 400-408
CrossRef63
K. Y. Khan, T. Xiong, I. McCafferty, P. Riley, T. Ismail, R. J. Lilford, D. G. Morton. (2007) Frequency and impact of extracolonic findings detected at computed tomographic colonography in a symptomatic population. British Journal of Surgery 94:3, 355-361
CrossRef64
K. J. Andresen. (2007) Virtual Colonoscopy. Imaging Decisions MRI 11:1, 21-28
CrossRef65
Jamshid Dehmeshki, Steve Halligan, Stuart A. Taylor, Mary E. Roddie, Justine McQuillan, Lesley Honeyfield, Hamdan Amin. (2007) Computer assisted detection software for CT colonography: effect of sphericity filter on performance characteristics for patients with and without fecal tagging. European Radiology 17:3, 662-668
CrossRef66
D. Burling, S. Halligan, S.A. Taylor, L. Honeyfield, M.E. Roddie. (2007) CT colonography: automatic measurement of polyp diameter compared with manual assessment — an in-vivo study. Clinical Radiology 62:2, 145-151
CrossRef67
Arye Blachar, Moshe Graif, Ada Kessler, Jacob Sosna. (2007) State-of-the-art CT colonography: Update on technique and performance. Current Colorectal Cancer Reports 3:1, 49-54
CrossRef68
Chin Hur, Daniel C. Chung, Robert E. Schoen, G. Scott Gazelle. (2007) The Management of Small Polyps Found by Virtual Colonoscopy: Results of a Decision Analysis. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 5:2, 237-244
CrossRef69
S. Purkayastha, T. Athanasiou, P. P. Tekkis, V. Constantinides, J. Teare, A. W. Darzi. (2007) Magnetic resonance colonography vs computed tomography colonography for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer: an indirect comparison. Colorectal Disease 9:2, 100-111
CrossRef70
Se Hyung Kim. (2007) CT Colonography. Journal of the Korean Medical Association 50:1, 33
CrossRef71
Ji-young Yun, Hee Jeong Ro, Jong Beom Park, Jung-Bin Choi, Ji Eun Chung, Yong Jin Kim, Won Hyuck Suh, Jong Kyun Lee. (2007) Diagnostic Performance of CT Colonography for the Detection of Colorectal Polyps. Korean Journal of Radiology 8:6, 484
CrossRef72
Arye Blachar, Jacob Sosna. (2007) CT Colonography (Virtual Colonoscopy): Technique, Indications and Performance. Digestion 76:1, 34-41
CrossRef73
Tammy Yuen-yee Wong, Wynnie Wai-man Lam, Nina Man-ching So, Janet Fung-yee Lee, Ka-lau Leung. (2007) Air-Inflated Magnetic Resonance Colonography in Patients with Incomplete Conventional Colonoscopy: Comparison with Intraoperative Findings, Pathology Specimens, and Follow-Up Conventional Colonoscopy. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 102:1, 56-63
CrossRef74
Steve Halligan, Douglas G. Altman, Susan Mallett, Stuart A. Taylor, David Burling, Mary Roddie, Lesley Honeyfield, Justine McQuillan, Hamdan Amin, Jamshid Dehmeshki. (2006) Computed Tomographic Colonography: Assessment of Radiologist Performance With and Without Computer-Aided Detection. Gastroenterology 131:6, 1690-1699
CrossRef75
Markus S. Juchems, Martin H.K. Hoffmann, Stefan A. Schmidt, Anna Apostel, Hans-Juergen Brambs, Andrik J. Aschoff. (2006) Bowel preparation for CT-colonography: Comparison of two different cleansing protocols. European Journal of Radiology 60:3, 460-464
CrossRef76
Suzanne M. Frentz, Ronald M. Summers. (2006) Current Status of CT Colonography. Academic Radiology 13:12, 1517-1531
CrossRef77
Andrew Slater, Stuart A. Taylor, Emily Tam, Louise Gartner, Julia Scarth, Chand Peiris, Arun Gupta, Michele Marshall, David Burling, Steve Halligan. (2006) Reader error during CT colonography: causes and implications for training. European Radiology 16:10, 2275-2283
CrossRef78
David Burling, Steve Halligan, Douglas G. Altman, Wendy Atkin, Clive Bartram, Helen Fenlon, Andrea Laghi, Jaap Stoker, Stuart Taylor, Roger Frost, Guido Dessey, Melinda Villiers, Jasper Florie, Shane Foley, Lesley Honeyfield, Riccardo Iannaccone, Teresa Gallo, Clive Kay, Philippe Lefere, Andrew Lowe, Filipo Mangiapane, Jesse Marrannes, Emmanuele Neri, Giulia Nieddu, David Nicholson, Alan O’Hare, Sante Ori, Benedetta Politi, Martin Poulus, Daniele Regge, Lisa Renaut, Velauthan Rudralingham, Saverio Signoretta, Paola Vagli, Victor Hulst, Jane Williams-Butt. (2006) Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography: effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting. European Radiology 16:8, 1737-1744
CrossRef79
Christoph Wald, Christopher D. Scheirey, Tai M. Tran, Nazli Erbay. (2006) An Update on Imaging of Colorectal Cancer. Surgical Clinics of North America 86:4, 819-847
CrossRef80
Stuart Taylor, Andrew Slater, Leslie Honeyfield, David Burling, Steve Halligan. (2006) CT Colonography: Effect of Colonic Distension on Polyp Measurement Accuracy and Agreement—In Vitro Study. Academic Radiology 13:7, 850-859
CrossRef81
Michael R. Thompson, Robert J. C. Steele, W. S. Atkin. (2006) Effective Screening for Bowel Cancer: A United Kingdom Perspective. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 49:6, 895-908
CrossRef82
E. A. Goldenberg, L. Khaitan, I.-P. Huang, C. D. Smith, E. Lin. (2006) Surgeon-initiated screening colonoscopy program based on SAGES and ASCRS recommendations in a general surgery practice. Surgical Endoscopy 20:6, 964-966
CrossRef83
T. M. Gallo, G. Galatola, C. Laudi, D. Regge. (2006) CT colonography: screening in individuals at high risk for colorectal cancer. Abdominal Imaging 31:3, 297-301
CrossRef84
P. Carrascosa, C. Capuñay, M. Ulla, E. M. López, R. Corti, J. Carrascosa. (2006) Elevated gastric lesions: virtual gastroscopy. Abdominal Imaging 31:3, 261-267
CrossRef85
Michael B. Wallace, Daniel Sullivan, Anil K. Rustgi. (2006) Advanced Imaging and Technology in Gastrointestinal Neoplasia: Summary of the AGA-NCI Symposium October 4–5, 2004. Gastroenterology 130:4, 1333-1342
CrossRef86
Kenneth E. Hung, Daniel C. Chung. (2006) Colorectal Cancer Screening: Today and Tomorrow. Southern Medical Journal 99:3, 240-246
CrossRef87
Lynn F. Butterly, Michael P. Chase, Heiko Pohl, Gale S. Fiarman. (2006) Prevalence of Clinically Important Histology in Small Adenomas. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 4:3, 343-348
CrossRef88
Alan O'Hare, Helen Fenlon. (2006) Virtual colonoscopy in the detection of colonic polyps and neoplasms. Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology 20:1, 79-92
CrossRef89
B KOO, C NG, J UKINGIM, A PREVOST, A FREEMAN. (2006) Minimal preparation CT for the diagnosis of suspected colorectal cancer in the frail and elderly patient. Clinical Radiology 61:2, 127-139
CrossRef90
Sapna Syngal, Elena Stoffel, Daniel Chung, Christopher Willett, David Schoetz, Paul Schroy, Deepa Jagadeesh, Kathleen Morel, Michael Ross. (2006) Detection of stool DNA mutations before and after treatment of colorectal neoplasia. Cancer 106:2, 277-283
CrossRef91
V. Fisichella, M. Hellström. (2006) Availability, Indications, and Technical Performance of Computed Tomographic Colonography: A National Survey. Acta Radiologica 47:3, 231-237
CrossRef92
Philippe Lefere, Stefaan Gryspeerdt, Karin Schotte. (2006) Virtual Colonoscopy: An Overview. Onkologie 29:6, 281-286
CrossRef93
Stacy D O??Connor, Ronald M Summers, J Richard Choi, Perry J Pickhardt. (2006) Oral Contrast Adherence to Polyps on CT Colonography. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 30:1, 51-57
CrossRef94
John H. Bond. (2005) Progress in Refining Virtual Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening. Gastroenterology 129:6, 2103-2106
CrossRef95
Chin Hur, G. Scott Gazelle, Ellen H. Hsu, Elkan F. Halpern, Daniel K. Podolsky. (2005) The Effect of Prior Colonic Imaging on Endoscopic Productivity: Potential Impact of Computed Tomographic Colonography. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 3:11, 1124-1127
CrossRef96
Matthew A. Barish, Tatiana C. Rocha. (2005) Multislice CT Colonography: Current Status and Limitations. Radiologic Clinics of North America 43:6, 1049-1062
CrossRef97
S. C. Goehde, E. Descher, A. Boekstegers, T. Lauenstein, C. Kühle, S. G. Ruehm, W. Ajaj. (2005) Dark lumen MR colonography based on fecal tagging for detection of colorectal masses: accuracy and patient acceptance. Abdominal Imaging 30:5, 576-583
CrossRef98
Fiona B Nicholson, Jennifer L Barro, Clive I Bartram, Jamshid Dehmeshki, Steven Halligan, Stuart Taylor, Michael A Kamm. (2005) The Role of CT Colonography in Colorectal Cancer Screening. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 100:10, 2315-2323
CrossRef99
Uri Ladabaum, Kenneth Song. (2005) Projected National Impact of Colorectal Cancer Screening on Clinical and Economic Outcomes and Health Services Demand. Gastroenterology 129:4, 1151-1162
CrossRef100
Jasper Florie, Rogier E. van Gelder, Jaap Stoker. (2005) Colonography by computed tomography. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 17:8, 809-813
CrossRef101
D. Hartmann, J. F. Riemann. (2005) Coloscopie virtuelle — par tomodensitométrie (CTDM) et résonance magnétique (CRM) — dans la détection des polypes coliques et des lésions néoplasiques. Acta Endoscopica 35:4, 569-579
CrossRef102
&NA;. (2005) Virtual Colonoscopy. Obstetrics & Gynecology 106:2, 398
CrossRef103
Charles J. Kahi, Douglas K. Rex. (2005) Screening and Surveillance of Colorectal Cancer. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America 15:3, 533-547
CrossRef104
Sukru Mehmet Erturk, Koenraad J. Mortelé, M. Raquel Oliva, Matthew A. Barish. (2005) State-of-the-Art Computed Tomographic and Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Gastrointestinal System. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America 15:3, 581-614
CrossRef105
Don C. Rockey. (2005) Colon Imaging: Computed Tomographic Colonography. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 3:7, S37-S41
CrossRef106
Meghan E. Blake, Jorge A. Soto, Robert A. Hayes, Joseph T. Ferrucci. (2005) Automated Volumetry at CT Colonography. Academic Radiology 12:5, 608-613
CrossRef107
Andreas G Schreyer, Stefan Gölder, Karl Scheibl, Markus Völk, Markus Lenhart, Antje Timmer, Jürgen Schölmerich, Stefan Feuerbach, Gerhard Rogler, Hans Herfarth, Johannes Seitz. (2005) Dark lumen magnetic resonance enteroclysis in combination with mri colonography for whole bowel assessment in patients with Crohn's disease: First clinical experience. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 11:4, 388-394
CrossRef108
M. Macari. (2005) CT colonography: the real deal. Abdominal Imaging 30:2, 184-194
CrossRef109
Dirk Bartz. (2005) Virtual Endoscopy in Research and Clinical Practice. Computer Graphics Forum 24:1, 111-126
CrossRef110
Shinobu Yamada, Masakazu Yashiro, Kiyoshi Maeda, Yukio Nishiguchi, Kosei Hirakawa. (2005) A novel high-specificity approach for colorectal neoplasia: Detection of K-ras2 oncogene mutation in normal mucosa. International Journal of Cancer 113:6, 1015-1021
CrossRef111
Sangeeta Agrawal, Anand Bhupinderjit, Manoop S. Bhutani, Lisa Boardman, Cuong Nguyen, Yvonne Romero, Radhika Srinvasan, Colmar Figueroa-Moseley. (2005) Colorectal Cancer in African Americans. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 100:3, 515-523
CrossRef112
Christopher S. Huang, Subodh K. Lal, Francis A. Farraye. (2005) Colorectal cancer screening in average risk individuals. Cancer Causes & Control 16:2, 171-188
CrossRef113
J. M. Hardacre, J. L. Ponsky, M. E. Baker. (2005) Colonoscopy vs CT colonography to screen for colorectal neoplasia in average-risk patients. Surgical Endoscopy 19:3, 448-456
CrossRef114
Masashi Hirooka, Hidehito Iuchi, Kiyotaka Kurose, Teru Kumagi, Norio Horiike, Morikazu Onji. (2005) Abdominal virtual ultrasonographic images reconstructed by multi-detector row helical computed tomography. European Journal of Radiology 53:2, 312-317
CrossRef115
Perry J. Pickhardt. (2005) CT colonography without catharsis: The ultimate study or useful additional option?. Gastroenterology 128:2, 521-522
CrossRef116
S TAYLOR, S HALLIGAN, D BURLING, P BASSETT, C BARTRAM. (2005) Intra-individual comparison of patient acceptability of multidetector-row CT colonography and double-contrast barium enema. Clinical Radiology 60:2, 207-214
CrossRef117
Mitchell S. Cappell. (2005) The pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and diagnosis of colon cancer and adenomatous polyps. Medical Clinics of North America 89:1, 1-42
CrossRef118
Takashi Izumiya, Ichiro Hirata, Norihiro Hamamoto, Mitsuru Matsuki, Isamu Narabayashi, Kanji Nishiguchi, Junji Okuda, Nobuhiko Tanigawa, Ken-ichi Katsu. (2005) USEFULNESS OF MULTI DETECTOR ROW COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY FOR DETECTION OF FLAT AND DEPRESSED COLORECTAL CANCER. Digestive Endoscopy 17:1, 36-43
CrossRef119
M. S. Juchems, J. Ehmann, H.-J. Brambs, A. J. Aschoff. (2005) A Retrospective Evaluation of Patient Acceptance of Computed Tomography Colonography (“Virtual Colonoscopy”) in Comparison with Conventional Colonoscopy in an Average Risk Screening Population. Acta Radiologica 46:7, 664-670
CrossRef120
Kale D. Bodily, Joel G. Fletcher, Trudy Engelby, Mark Percival, Jared A. Christensen, Brett Young, Aaron J. Krych, Douglas C. Vander Kooi, Drew Rodysill, Jeff L. Fidler, C. Daniel Johnson. (2005) Nonradiologists as second readers for intraluminal findings at CT colonography1. Academic Radiology 12:1, 67-73
CrossRef121
Zvi Lefkovitz, Robert Shapiro, Stephen Koch, Mitchell S. Cappell. (2005) The emerging role of virtual colonoscopy. Medical Clinics of North America 89:1, 111-138
CrossRef122
DC Rockey, E Paulson, D Niedzwiecki, W Davis, HB Bosworth, L Sanders, J Yee, J Henderson, P Hatten, S Burdick, A Sanyal, DT Rubin, M Sterling, G Akerkar, MS Bhutani, K Binmoeller, J Garvie, EJ Bini, K McQuaid, WL Foster, WM Thompson, A Dachman, R Halvorsen. (2005) Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. The Lancet 365:9456, 305-311
CrossRef123
Aza Abdulla, Adrian Thomas, Anthony Jenkins. (2004) Imaging the large bowel in the elderly. Geriatrics and Gerontology International 4:4, 193-205
CrossRef124
Christoph U. Herborn, Fan Yang, Philippe Robert, Christine Lacl??d??re, Xavier Violas, Jacques Bara, Claire Corot, J??rg F. Debatin, Stefan G. Ruehm. (2004) Dark Lumen Magnetic Resonance Colonography in a Rodent Polyp Model. Investigative Radiology 39:12, 723-727
CrossRef125
Chin Hur, G. Scott Gazelle, Michael E. Zalis, Daniel K. Podolsky. (2004) An analysis of the potential impact of computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy) on colonoscopy demand. Gastroenterology 127:5, 1312-1321
CrossRef126
S. Cirillo, R. Bonamini, F. Gaita, Irene Tosetti, M. Giuseppe, M. Longo, F. Bianchi, L. Vivalda, D. Regge. (2004) Magnetic resonance angiography virtual endoscopy in the assessment of pulmonary veins before radiofrequency ablation procedures for atrial fibrillation. European Radiology 14:11, 2053-2060
CrossRef127
Riccardo Iannaccone, Andrea Laghi, Carlo Catalano, Filippo Mangiapane, Antonietta Lamazza, Alberto Schillaci, Giovanni Sinibaldi, Takamichi Murakami, Paolo Sammartino, Masatoshi Hori, Francesca Piacentini, Italo Nofroni, Vincenzo Stipa, Roberto Passariello. (2004) Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 127:5, 1300-1311
CrossRef128
Roshini C Rajapaksa, Michael Macari, Edmund J Bini. (2004) Prevalence and Impact of Extracolonic Findings in Patients Undergoing CT Colonography. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 38:9, 767-771
CrossRef129
Hanno Hoppe, Peter Netzer, Adrian Spreng, Cristiana Quattropani, Joerg Mattich, Hans-Peter Dinkel. (2004) Prospective Comparison of Contrast Enhanced CT Colonography and Conventional Colonoscopy for Detection of Colorectal Neoplasms in a Single Institutional Study Using Second-Look Colonoscopy with Discrepant Results. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 99:10, 1924-1935
CrossRef130
S TAYLOR. (2004) Multidetector-row CT duodenography in familial adenomatous polyposis: a pilot study. Clinical Radiology 59:10, 939-945
CrossRef131
Jacques van Dam, Peter Cotton, C. Daniel Johnson, Beth G. McFarland, Benoit C. Pineau, Dawn Provenzale, David Ransohoff, Douglas Rex, Don Rockey, F. Taylor Wootton. (2004) AGA future trends report: CT colonography. Gastroenterology 127:3, 970-984
CrossRef132
M. Vella, S. MacKenzie, I.E. Young, R. G. Molloy, P. J. O’Dwyer. (2004) Impact of video colonoscopy on stage and outcome of patients with symptomatic colorectal cancer. Surgical Endoscopy 18:8, 1268-1271
CrossRef133
Christoph Vogt, Mathias Cohnen, Andreas Beck, Stephan vom Dahl, Volker Aurich, Ulrich Mödder, Dieter Häussinger. (2004) Detection of colorectal polyps by multislice CT colonography with ultra-low-dose technique: comparison with high-resolution videocolonoscopy. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 60:2, 201-209
CrossRef134
Judy Yee. (2004) Screening CT colonography. Radiologic Clinics of North America 42:4, 757-766
CrossRef135
Susanne C. Goehde, Michael Forsting, Joerg F. Debatin. (2004) Screening with MRI: a new “all inclusive” protocol. Radiologic Clinics of North America 42:4, 725-734
CrossRef136
Rogier E. van Gelder, C.Yung Nio, Jasper Florie, Joep F. Bartelsman, Pleun Snel, Steven W. de Jager, Sander J. van Deventer, Johan S. Laméris, Patrick M.M. Bossuyt, Jaap Stoker. (2004) Computed tomographic colonography compared with colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 127:1, 41-48
CrossRef137
Uri Ladabaum, Kenneth Song, A.Mark Fendrick. (2004) Colorectal neoplasia screening with virtual colonoscopy: when, at what cost, and with what national impact?. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2:7, 554-563
CrossRef138
K. S. Tagore, T. R. Levin, M. J. Lawson. (2004) The evolution to stool DNA testing for colorectal cancer. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics 19:12, 1225-1233
CrossRef139
Rosie G. Scott, John T. Edwards, Lin Fritschi, Noellene M. Foster, Richard M. Mendelson, Geoffrey M. Forbes. (2004) Community-Based Screening by Colonoscopy or Computed Tomographic Colonography in Asymptomatic Average-Risk Subjects. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 99:6, 1145-1151
CrossRef140
Kenneth Song, A.Mark Fendrick, Uri Ladabaum. (2004) Fecal DNA testing compared with conventional colorectal cancer screening methods: a decision analysis. Gastroenterology 126:5, 1270-1279
CrossRef141
Wynnie W.M. Lam, Wai K. Leung, Justin K.L. Wu, Nina M.C. So, Joseph J.Y. Sung. (2004) Screening of colonic tumors by air-inflated magnetic resonance (MR) colonography. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 19:4, 447-452
CrossRef142
Benoit C. Pineau, David J. Vining. (2004) Reply to Tursi. Gastroenterology 126:3, 938-939
CrossRef143
D. A. Lieberman, W. Atkin. (2004) Balancing the ideal versus the practical-considerations of colorectal cancer prevention and screening. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics 19:s1, 71-76
CrossRef144
G. M. Forbes, J. T. Edwards, N. M. Foster, C. J. Wood, R. M. Mendelson. (2004) Randomized single blind trial of two low-volume bowel preparations for screening computed tomographic colonography. Abdominal Imaging 30:1, 48-52
CrossRef145
Judy Yee. 2004. Virtual Colonoscopy. , 613-616.
CrossRef146
R. E. Gelder, J. Florie, J. Stoker. (2004) Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance with CT colonography: current controversies and obstacles. Abdominal Imaging 30:1, 5-12
CrossRef147
R. Iannaccone, A. Laghi, R. Passariello. (2004) Colorectal carcinoma: detection and staging with multislice CT (MSCT) colonography. Abdominal Imaging 30:1, 13-19
CrossRef148
Wai K. Leung, Wynnie W. M. Lam, Justin C. Y. Wu, Nina M. C. So, Sara S. L. Fung, Francis K. L. Chan, Ka-Fai To, Deacons T. K. Yeung, Joseph J. Y. Sung. (2004) Magnetic Resonance Colonography in the Detection of Colonic Neoplasm in High-Risk and Average-Risk Individuals. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 99:1, 102-108
CrossRef149
D. Regge, T. M. Gallo, G. Nieddu, G. Galatola, M. Fracchia, E. Neri, P. Vagli, C. Bartolozzi. (2004) Ileocecal valve imaging on computed tomographic colonography. Abdominal Imaging 30:1, 20-25
CrossRef150
D Burling. (2004) CT colonography practice in the UK: a national survey. Clinical Radiology 59:1, 39-43
CrossRef151
S Kealey. (2004) Minimal preparation computed tomography instead of barium enema/colonoscopy for suspected colon cancer in frail elderly patients: an outcome analysis study. Clinical Radiology 59:1, 44-52
CrossRef152
Morrin, Martina M., LaMont, J. Thomas, . (2003) Screening Virtual Colonoscopy — Ready for Prime Time?. New England Journal of Medicine 349:23, 2261-2264
Full Text153
Pickhardt, Perry J., Choi, J. Richard, Hwang, Inku, Butler, James A., Puckett, Michael L., Hildebrandt, Hans A., Wong, Roy K., Nugent, Pamela A., Mysliwiec, Pauline A., Schindler, William R., . (2003) Computed Tomographic Virtual Colonoscopy to Screen for Colorectal Neoplasia in Asymptomatic Adults. New England Journal of Medicine 349:23, 2191-2200
Full Text154
Sang-Woong Lee, Hisashi Shinohara, Mitsuru Matsuki, Junji Okuda, Eiji Nomura, Hideaki Mabuchi, Kanji Nishiguchi, Kyoichi Takaori, Isamu Narabayashi, Nobuhiko Tanigawa. (2003) Preoperative simulation of vascular anatomy by three-dimensional computed tomography imaging in laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 197:6, 927-936
CrossRef155
Angel Ferrández, James A DiSario. (2003) Colorectal cancer: screening and surveillance for high-risk individuals. Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy 3:6, 851-862
CrossRef156
Teresa M Gallo, Giovanni Galatola, Mario Fracchia, Giuseppina Defazio, Francesca De Bei, Angelo Pera, Daniele Regge. (2003) Computed tomography colonography in routine clinical practice. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 15:12, 1323-1331
CrossRef157
Livia Biancone, Roberto Fiori, Claudio Tosti, Alessandro Marinetti, Mario Catarinacci, Francesca De Nigris, Giovanni Simonetti, Francesco Pallone. (2003) Virtual Colonoscopy Compared With Conventional Colonoscopy for Stricturing Postoperative Recurrence in Crohn's Disease. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 9:6, 343-350
CrossRef158
S Taylor. (2003) Use of Multidetector-row CT Colonography for Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia in Patients Referred via the Department of Health “2-Week-Wait” Initiative. Clinical Radiology 58:11, 855-861
CrossRef159
R. E. van Gelder, J. Florie, J. Stoker. (2003) CT Colonography: Practical Aspects and Present Status. Imaging Decisions MRI 7:3, 4-9
CrossRef160
C.Daniel Johnson, Alicia Y. Toledano, Benjamin A. Herman, Abraham H. Dachman, Elizabeth G. Mcfarland, Matthew A. Barish, James A. Brink, Randy D. Ernst, Joel G. Fletcher, Robert A. Halvorsen, Amy K. Hara, Kenneth D. Hopper, Robert E. Koehler, David S.K. Lu, Michael Macari, Robert L. Maccarty, Frank H. Miller, Martina Morrin, Erik K. Paulson, Judy Yee, Michael Zalis. (2003) Computerized tomographic colonography: performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting1 1Vital Images Inc. has supported research at UCLA (to D. S. K. L., J. A. B., and E. G. M.). Monex provided support (to M. M.). GE Medical Systems provided software license and research support (to C. D. J., J. A. B., and A. H. D.). Voxar, Inc. produces products that compete with products listed in this paper (to M. A. B.).The study design was approved by the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. Computerized tomographic colonography examinations for American College of Radiology Imaging Network Protocol A6656 were submitted by E. G. McFarland, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, St. Louis, Missouri; M. Zalis, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; C. D. Johnson, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; M. Macari, New York University, New York, New York; D. Lu, University of California, Los Angeles, California; A. H. Dachman, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; M. Morrin, Beth Israel/Deaconess Hospitals, Boston, Massachusetts; and J. Yee, Veterans Administration Hospital, San Francisco, California. Workstations for performing computerized tomographic colonography interpretations were loaned to the American College of Radiology (ACR) by General Electric, Vital Images, and the Mayo Clinic. Each provided technical support for installation at the ACR. Computerized tomographic colonography examinations were removed and workstations returned after the study interpretations were completed.. Gastroenterology 125:3, 688-695
CrossRef161
S. A. Taylor, S. Halligan, M. Vance, A. Windsor, W. Atkin, C. I. Bartram. (2003) Use of multidetector-row computed tomographic colonography before flexible sigmoidoscopy in the investigation of rectal bleeding. British Journal of Surgery 90:9, 1163-1164
CrossRef162
S Taylor. (2003) Optimizing Bowel Preparation for Multidetector Row CT Colonography: Effect of Citramag and Picolax. Clinical Radiology 58:9, 723-732
CrossRef163
George Triadafilopoulos, Thomas Wang. 2003. Endoscopy. .
CrossRef164
Benoit C Pineau, Electra D Paskett, G.John Chen, Mark A Espeland, Kim Phillips, James P Han, Claudia Mikulaninec, David J Vining. (2003) Virtual colonoscopy using oral contrast compared with colonoscopy for the detection of patients with colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 125:2, 304-310
CrossRef165
S. MacKenzie, J. Norrie, M. Vella, I. Drummond, A. Walker, R. Molloy, D. J. Galloway, P. J. O'Dwyer. (2003) Randomized clinical trial comparing consultant-led or open access investigation for large bowel symptoms. British Journal of Surgery 90:8, 941-947
CrossRef166
Hoon Ji, Joshua A. Rolnick, Steven Haker, Matthew A. Barish. (2003) Multislice CT colonography: current status and limitations. European Journal of Radiology 47:2, 123-134
CrossRef167
David E Loren, James Lewis, Michael L Kochman. (2003) Colon cancer: detection and prevention. Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America 17:2, 553-574
CrossRef168
R.M.S Mitchell, M.F Byrne, J Baillie. (2003) Colonoscopy or barium enema for population colorectal cancer screening?. Digestive and Liver Disease 35:4, 207-211
CrossRef169
Abraham H Dachman, Hiro Yoshida. (2003) Virtual colonoscopy: past, present,and future. Radiologic Clinics of North America 41:2, 377-393
CrossRef170
Theodore R. Levin. (2003) Does family history still matter in the era of screening colonoscopy?. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 1:2, 69-70
CrossRef171
Maarten Thomeer, Iacopo Carbone, Hilde Bosmans, Gabriel Kiss, Didier Bielen, Dirk Vanbeckevoort, Eric Van Cutsem, Paul Rutgeerts, Guy Marchal. (2003) Stool Tagging Applied in Thin-slice Multidetector Computed Tomography Colonography. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 27:2, 132-139
CrossRef172
Brooks D. Cash, Philip Schoenfeld, Douglas Rex. (2003) An evidence-based medicine approach to studies of diagnostic tests: Assessing the validity of virtual colonoscopy. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 1:2, 136-144
CrossRef173
S Taylor. (2003) CT Colonography: Methods, Pathology and Pitfalls. Clinical Radiology 58:3, 179-190
CrossRef174
B SAUNDERS. (2003) Viewing the Colon: Imaging and Colonoscopy. Medicine 31:2, 56-60
CrossRef175
Judy Yee, Darice Liu, Patricia Lew. (2003) Colorectal Cancer Screening in Women: The Role of CT Colonography. Journal of Women's Imaging 5:1, 25-39
CrossRef176
H.-J. Brambs, M.S. Juchems. (2003) Virtual endoscopy using CT scan. Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies 12:5, 207-216
CrossRef177
Benoit C. Pineau, David J. Ott. (2003) CT colonography to detect colorectal polyps: a virtual success?. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 98:1, 210-211
CrossRef178
David J. Lomas. (2002) Techniques for Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Bowel. Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging 13:6, 379-387
CrossRef179
Thomas C. Lauenstein, Jörg F. Debatin. (2002) Magnetic Resonance Colonography with Fecal Tagging: An Innovative Approach Without Bowel Cleansing. Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging 13:6, 435-444
CrossRef180
Amy K Hara. (2002) The future of colorectal imaging: computed tomographic colonography. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America 31:4, 1045-1060
CrossRef181
BENJAMIN CHUN-YU WONG, WAI-MAN WONG, JOHN KF CHAN, KAM-CHUEN LAI, WAYNE HC HU, CHI-KUEN CHAN, SHIU-KUM LAM, DAVID L CARR-LOCKE. (2002) Virtual colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps and cancers in a Chinese population. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 17:12, 1323-1327
CrossRef182
Bettina Saar, Thomas Rösch, Ernst J. Rummeny. (2002) Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Challenge for Magnetic Resonance Colonography. Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging 13:6, 427-434
CrossRef183
Angel Ferrández, James A. DiSario. (2002) Hereditary colorectal cancer: Screening and management. Current Treatment Options in Oncology 3:6, 459-474
CrossRef184
David F Ransohoff. (2002) Screening colonoscopy in balance. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America 31:4, 1031-1044
CrossRef185
Mitchell S Cappell, David Friedel. (2002) The role of sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy in the diagnosis and management of lower gastrointestinal disorders: endoscopic findings, therapy, and complications. Medical Clinics of North America 86:6, 1253-1288
CrossRef186
David H Robbins, Steven H Itzkowitz. (2002) The molecular and genetic basis of colon cancer. Medical Clinics of North America 86:6, 1467-1495
CrossRef187
Bernard Levin, Robert A. Smith, Gabriel E. Feldman, Graham A. Colditz, Robert H. Fletcher, Marion Nadel, David A. Rothenberger, Paul S. Schroy, Sally W. Vernon, Richard Wender, . (2002) Promoting early detection tests for colorectal carcinoma and adenomatous polyps. Cancer 95:8, 1618-1628
CrossRef188
M. SIMÓ, F. LOMEÑA, J. SETOAIN, G. PÉREZ, P. CASTELLUCCI, J. M. COSTANSA, J. SETOAIN-QUINQUER, F. DOMÉNECH-TORNÉ, I. CARRIÓ. (2002) FDG-PET improves the management of patients with suspected recurrence of colorectal cancer. Nuclear Medicine Communications 23:10, 975-982
CrossRef189
Elena Martinez Stoffel, Sapna Syngal. (2002) Colon cancer screening strategies. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 18:5, 595-601
CrossRef190
Abraham H Dachman. (2002) Virtual colonoscopy. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America 31:3, 747-757
CrossRef191
D. Hartmann, J. F. Riemann. (2002) Endoscopie et IRM: une collaboration nécessaire. Acta Endoscopica 32:5, 797-804
CrossRef192
Kathryn A Peterson, James A DiSario. (2002) Secondary prevention: screening and surveillance of persons at average and high risk for colorectal cancer. Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America 16:4, 841-865
CrossRef193
Agnès Vitry, E. Corbillon, Anne-Isabelle Poullié. (2002) Place de la coloscople virtuelle dans le dépistage du cancer colorectal. Acta Endoscopica 32:4, 665-681
CrossRef194
Aytekin Oto. (2002) Virtual endoscopy. European Journal of Radiology 42:3, 231-239
CrossRef195
Patrick M. Lynch. (2002) Screening colonoscopy for family history of colorectal cancer: A growing consensus. Annals of Surgical Oncology 9:5, 425-427
CrossRef196
David E Loren, James Lewis, Michael L Kochman. (2002) Colon cancer: detection and prevention. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America 31:2, 565-586
CrossRef197
(2002) Screening for Colorectal Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 346:21, 1672-1674
Full Text198
B. Ginnerup Pedersen, T. E. Moller Christiansen, F. Viborg Mortensen, H. Christensen, S. Laurberg. (2002) Bowel cleansing methods prior to CT colonography. A prospective, comparative, randomized blinded study. Acta Radiologica 43:3, 306-311
CrossRef199
Clare S. Smith, Helen M. Fenlon. (2002) Virtual colonoscopy. Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology 16:2, 219-236
CrossRef200
Joseph Jy Sung. (2002) Changing role of endoscopy in the new millennium. Bushell Lecture, Asia-Pacific Digestive Week 2001. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 17:4, 369-373
CrossRef201
Richard M Mendelson, Geoffrey M Forbes. (2002) Computed tomography colonography (virtual colonoscopy): Review. Australasian Radiology 46:1, 1-12
CrossRef202
Andrea Laghi, Riccardo Iannaccone, Iacopo Carbone, Carlo Catalano, Emilio Di Giulio, Alberto Schillaci, Roberto Passariello. (2002) Detection of colorectal lesions with virtual computed tomographic colonography. The American Journal of Surgery 183:2, 124-131
CrossRef203
Ransohoff, David F., Sandler, Robert S., . (2002) Screening for Colorectal Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 346:1, 40-44
Full Text204
Kenneth Miller, Jerome D. Waye. (2002) Colorectal Polyps in the Elderly. Drugs & Aging 19:6, 393-404
CrossRef205
Hajime Kuwayama, Mamoru Iimuro, Yoshinori Kitazumi, Gordon Luk. (2002) Virtual endoscopy: current perspectives. Journal of Gastroenterology 37:S13, 100-105
CrossRef206
John H. Bond. (2002) Colorectal cancer screening: the potential role of virtual colonoscopy. Journal of Gastroenterology 37:S13, 92-96
CrossRef207
David A Ahlquist, Anthony P Shuber. (2002) Stool screening for colorectal cancer: evolution from occult blood to molecular markers. Clinica Chimica Acta 315:1-2, 157-168
CrossRef208
M. H. Svensson, E. Svensson, M. Hellstrom. (2002) Bowel wall visualisation at CT colonography. Acta Radiologica 43:1, 87-95
CrossRef209
Kyle Holen, Nancy Kemeny. 2002. Colorectal Cancer: Epidemiology and Treatment. , 1-8.
CrossRef210
H. Yoshida, J. Nappi. (2001) Three-dimensional computer-aided diagnosis scheme for detection of colonic polyps. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 20:12, 1261-1274
CrossRef211
W.Douglas Wong. (2001) What’s new in colon and rectal surgery. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 193:6, 633-640
CrossRef212
Richard M. Mendelson. (2001) Barium enema: to BE or not to BE: Is that the question?. ANZ Journal of Surgery 71:11, 627-628
CrossRef213
Joel G. Fletcher, C. Daniel Johnson, Judd E. Reed, John Garry. (2001) Feasibility of Planar Virtual Pathology: A New Paradigm in Volume-Rendered CT Colonography. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 25:6, 864-869
CrossRef214
John F. Bruzzi, Darren D. Brennan, Helen M. Fenlon. (2001) Trends in CT colonography. Current Gastroenterology Reports 3:5, 437-445
CrossRef215
Detsky, Allan S., . (2001) Screening for Colon Cancer — Can We Afford Colonoscopy?. New England Journal of Medicine 345:8, 607-608
Full Text216
Robert L. Galloway. (2001) T
HE PROCESS AND DEVELOPMENT OF IMAGE -GUIDED PROCEDURES . Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering 3:1, 83-108
CrossRef217
Yoshitaka Masutani, Hiroyuki Yoshida, Peter M. MacEneaney, Abraham H. Dachman. (2001) Automated Segmentation of Colonic Walls for Computerized Detection of Polyps in CT Colonography. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 25:4, 629-638
CrossRef218
I. Dove-Edwin, H. J. W. Thomas. (2001) The prevention of colorectal cancer. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics 15:3, 323-336
CrossRef219
Giuseppe Angelelli, Amato A. Stabile Ianora, Arnaldo Scardapane, Pasquale Pedote, Maurizio Memeo, Antonio Rotondo. (2001) Role of computerized tomography in the staging of gastrointestinal neoplasms. Seminars in Surgical Oncology 20:2, 109-121
CrossRef220
Terence L. Angtuaco, Geraldine D. Banaad-Omiotek, Colin W. Howden. (2001) Differing attitudes toward virtual and conventional colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening: surveys among primary care physicians and potential patients. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 96:3, 887-893
CrossRef221
David T. Rubin, Abraham H. Dachman. (2001) Virtual colonoscopy: A novel imaging modality for colorectal cancer. Current Oncology Reports 3:2, 88-93
CrossRef222
Glenn M. Eisen, John F. Johanson. (2001) EVIDENCE-BASED APPROACH TO SCREENING AND SURVEILLANCE FOR COLORECTAL CANCER. Evidence-Based Gastroenterology 2:1, 44-49
CrossRef223
Cathy McNeill Dykes. (2001) Virtual Colonoscopy: A New Approach for Colorectal Cancer Screening. Gastroenterology Nursing 24:1, 5-11
CrossRef224
Amin S. Chaoui, Matthew A. Barish. (2001) Virtual colonoscopy: a new tool for colorectal cancer screening. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 17:1, 78-85
CrossRef225
Robert S. Bresalier. (2001) Large intestine. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 17:1, 63-64
CrossRef226
(2000) Comparison of Colonoscopy and Double-Contrast Barium Enema. New England Journal of Medicine 343:23, 1728-1730
Full Text227
Patrik Rogalla, Noga Meiri, Jens C Rückert, Bernd Hamm. (2000) Colonography using multislice CT. European Journal of Radiology 36:2, 81-85
CrossRef228
Ronald L. Arenson, Katherine P. Andriole, David E. Avrin, Robert G. Gould. (2000) Computers in imaging and health care: Now and in the future. Journal of Digital Imaging 13:4, 145-156
CrossRef229
Zsolt Tarján, Tamás Zágoni, Tamás Györke, Ádám Mester, Kinga Karlinger, Ernő K Makó. (2000) Spiral CT colonography in inflammatory bowel disease. European Journal of Radiology 35:3, 193-198
CrossRef230
Walter E. Smalley, Glenn M. Eisen. (2000) Colorectal cancer screening 2000: The role of colonoscopy in average-risk individuals. Current Gastroenterology Reports 2:5, 406-412
CrossRef231
Podolsky, Daniel K., . (2000) Going the Distance — The Case for True Colorectal-Cancer Screening. New England Journal of Medicine 343:3, 207-208
Full Text232
Fletcher, Robert H., . (2000) The End of Barium Enemas?. New England Journal of Medicine 342:24, 1823-1824
Full Text233
Robert H. Fletcher. (2000) Screening colonoscopy: option or preference?. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 51:5, 624-627
CrossRef234
Douglas K. Rex, David A. Johnson, David A. Lieberman, Randall W. Burt, Amnon Sonnenberg. (2000) Colorectal cancer prevention 2000: screening recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology. In conjunction with ACG Consumer Brochure: "ACG Recommendations on Colorectal Cancer Screening for Average and Higher Risk Patients in Clinical Practice".. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 95:4, 868-877
CrossRef235
(2000) Virtual Colonoscopy. New England Journal of Medicine 342:10, 737-739
Full Text236
Bond, John H., . (1999) Virtual Colonoscopy — Promising, but Not Ready for Widespread Use. New England Journal of Medicine 341:20, 1540-1542
Full Text
- Letters
