File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1046/j.1572-0241.2003.04008.x
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-1542702977
- PMID: 14687150
- WOS: WOS:000188047200021
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Magnetic resonance colonography in the detection of colonic neoplasm in high-risk and average-risk individuals
Title | Magnetic resonance colonography in the detection of colonic neoplasm in high-risk and average-risk individuals |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2004 |
Publisher | Nature Publishing Group. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.nature.com/ajg/index.html |
Citation | American Journal Of Gastroenterology, 2004, v. 99 n. 1, p. 102-108 How to Cite? |
Abstract | OBJECTIVES: Magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) is a new noninvasive diagnostic modality for colorectal cancer. However, the use of MRC in the detection of colorectal neoplasm in average-risk individuals remains unknown. This study determined the performance and the patient's preference of MRC in the detection of colorectal neoplasm. METHODS: Both high-risk (i.e., symptoms suggestive of colorectal neoplasm, positive fecal occult blood test, history of colorectal cancer in one or more first-degree relatives) and average-risk (i.e., asymptomatic individuals >50 yr) individuals were recruited. MRC was performed immediately prior to conventional colonoscopy (CC) by using air inflation without contrast. The finding on CC together with histology was used as a gold standard. Patients' pain and discomfort score were recorded immediately and 24 h after the procedure. They were also asked about their preferences for the two procedures. RESULTS: A total of 165 patients (79 average risk and 86 high risk) were recruited. Eight patients had incomplete MRC and one patient had failed CC. Of the remaining 156 patients, 4 were found to have colonic cancer and 31 were found to have 67 polyps. MRC correctly identified 3 cancers (sensitivity 75%, specificity 99.3%) and 4 patients with colonic polyps (sensitivity 12.9% and specificity 97.6%). Sensitivity of MRC tended to be lower in polyps <10 mm in size and in average-risk individuals. The mean procedure time of CC was significantly shorter than MRC (13.6 ± 6.7 vs 20.6 ± 2.7 min, p < 0.001). Although there was no significant difference in the pain and discomfort scores of the 2 procedures, 75% of patients preferred CC to MRC. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of MRC when used in the detection of colonic neoplasm in average-risk individuals is unsatisfactory. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/162799 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 8.0 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.391 |
ISI Accession Number ID | |
References |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Leung, WK | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Lam, WWM | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Wu, JCY | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | So, NMC | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Fung, SSL | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Chan, FKL | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | To, KF | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Yeung, DTK | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Sung, JJY | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2012-09-05T05:23:41Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2012-09-05T05:23:41Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2004 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | American Journal Of Gastroenterology, 2004, v. 99 n. 1, p. 102-108 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0002-9270 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/162799 | - |
dc.description.abstract | OBJECTIVES: Magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) is a new noninvasive diagnostic modality for colorectal cancer. However, the use of MRC in the detection of colorectal neoplasm in average-risk individuals remains unknown. This study determined the performance and the patient's preference of MRC in the detection of colorectal neoplasm. METHODS: Both high-risk (i.e., symptoms suggestive of colorectal neoplasm, positive fecal occult blood test, history of colorectal cancer in one or more first-degree relatives) and average-risk (i.e., asymptomatic individuals >50 yr) individuals were recruited. MRC was performed immediately prior to conventional colonoscopy (CC) by using air inflation without contrast. The finding on CC together with histology was used as a gold standard. Patients' pain and discomfort score were recorded immediately and 24 h after the procedure. They were also asked about their preferences for the two procedures. RESULTS: A total of 165 patients (79 average risk and 86 high risk) were recruited. Eight patients had incomplete MRC and one patient had failed CC. Of the remaining 156 patients, 4 were found to have colonic cancer and 31 were found to have 67 polyps. MRC correctly identified 3 cancers (sensitivity 75%, specificity 99.3%) and 4 patients with colonic polyps (sensitivity 12.9% and specificity 97.6%). Sensitivity of MRC tended to be lower in polyps <10 mm in size and in average-risk individuals. The mean procedure time of CC was significantly shorter than MRC (13.6 ± 6.7 vs 20.6 ± 2.7 min, p < 0.001). Although there was no significant difference in the pain and discomfort scores of the 2 procedures, 75% of patients preferred CC to MRC. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of MRC when used in the detection of colonic neoplasm in average-risk individuals is unsatisfactory. | en_US |
dc.language | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | Nature Publishing Group. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.nature.com/ajg/index.html | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | American Journal of Gastroenterology | en_US |
dc.title | Magnetic resonance colonography in the detection of colonic neoplasm in high-risk and average-risk individuals | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.email | Leung, WK:waikleung@hku.hk | en_US |
dc.identifier.authority | Leung, WK=rp01479 | en_US |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1046/j.1572-0241.2003.04008.x | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 14687150 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-1542702977 | en_US |
dc.relation.references | http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-1542702977&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpage | en_US |
dc.identifier.volume | 99 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issue | 1 | en_US |
dc.identifier.spage | 102 | en_US |
dc.identifier.epage | 108 | en_US |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000188047200021 | - |
dc.publisher.place | United States | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Leung, WK=7201504523 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Lam, WWM=13410486800 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Wu, JCY=7409253910 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | So, NMC=7003780596 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Fung, SSL=7201970030 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Chan, FKL=7202586434 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | To, KF=36785812800 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Yeung, DTK=19838759600 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Sung, JJY=35405352400 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0002-9270 | - |