Incidental extracolonic findings on bright lumen MR colonography in a population at increased risk for colorectal carcinoma
| Autor: | Jasper Florie, Lubbertus C. Baak, Rutger A.J. Nievelstein, Chung Yung Nio, Erlangga Yusuf, Sebastian Jensch, Jaap Stoker |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Other departments, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Cancer Center Amsterdam |
| Rok vydání: | 2011 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Gadolinium DTPA Male medicine.medical_specialty Virtual colonoscopy Colorectal cancer Population Contrast Media Colonoscopy Malignancy Risk Factors Image Interpretation Computer-Assisted medicine Humans Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging Prospective Studies Prospective cohort study education Aged Aged 80 and over Incidental Findings education.field_of_study medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Cancer Magnetic resonance imaging General Medicine Middle Aged medicine.disease Magnetic Resonance Imaging Female Radiology Colorectal Neoplasms business |
| Zdroj: | European journal of radiology, 78(1), 135-141. Elsevier Ireland Ltd |
| ISSN: | 0720-048X |
| Popis: | Purpose Incidental extracolonic findings affect patient treatment and cost. Therefore, to consider magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) as a tool for colorectal cancer and polyps screening, more knowledge is needed on extracolonic findings. In this study, we sought to determine the prevalence and the spectrum of extracolonic findings in patients with an increased risk colorectal cancer that underwent bright lumen MRC. Materials and methods MRC examinations were performed in 210 patients. A gadolinium solution was administered rectally for distension of the colon. Extracolonic findings were scored by two radiologists and classified by using C-RADS Reporting System. All findings (with advice regarding work-up) were reported to the patient's physician and followed up for 4.5 years on average. Results Extracolonic findings were found in 125 (59.5%) patients. Ten (4.8%) had “potentially important” findings (C-RADS category E4). Twenty-five patients (11.9%) had “likely unimportant” findings (E3), 90 (42.8%) had “clinically unimportant” findings (E2) and 85 (40.5%) had a normal exam (E1). In 14 (6.7%) patients additional work-up was performed for their incidentally discovered lesions. In three of them surgery was performed. After work-up, only in two (1.0%) patients a malignancy was found. Conclusion The number of new relevant extracolonic findings is small and the required additional work-up is limited. This should be considered for implementation of ‘bright lumen’ MRC as a screening tool. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect