The data indicate that sufficient contrast consumption and optimal timing of data acquisition are essential to distention of the small bowel. Oral contrast agent protocols should be adapted to the bowel region in question.

No abstract

In this preliminary study, PET/CT colonography is at least equivalent to CT + PET for tumor staging in patients with colorectal cancer. Thus, PET/CT colonography in conjunction with optical colonoscopy may be a suitable concept of tumor staging for patients with colorectal cancer.

Background and aim: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) without bowel cleansing in a screening population and compare the results to colonoscopy as a standard of reference. Methods: 315 screening patients, older than 50 years with a normal risk profile for colorectal cancer, were included in this study. For MRC, a tagging agent (5.0% Gastrografin, 1.0% barium sulphate, 0.2% locust bean gum) was ingested with each main meal within 2 days prior to MRC. No bowel cleansing was applied. For the magnetic resonance examination, a rectal water enema was administered. Data collection was based on contrast enhanced T1 weighted images and TrueFISP images. Magnetic resonance data were analysed for image quality and the presence of colorectal lesions. Conventional colonoscopy and histopathological samples served as reference. Results: In 4% of all colonic segments, magnetic resonance image quality was insufficient because of untagged faecal material. Adenomatous polyps .5 mm were detected by means of MRC, with a sensitivity of 83.0%. Overall specificity was 90.2% (false positive findings in 19 patients). However, only 16 of 153 lesions ,5 mm and 9 of 127 hyperplastic polyps could be visualised on magnetic resonance images. Conclusions: Faecal tagging MRC is applicable for screening purposes. It provides good accuracy for the detection of relevant (ie, adenomatous) colorectal lesions .5 mm in a screening population. However, refinements to optimise image quality of faecal tagging are needed.

In conclusion, visibility of small liver lesions diminished significantly during CT-guided biopsy due to needle artifacts, with a fourfold increased rate of insufficiently visualized lesions and of false-negative histological results. Contrast enhancement did not reveal better results.