An-Najah Staff

Purpose: To prove the feasibility of air-distended magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) and compare it with waterbased distention.
Materials and Methods: In five volunteers, the colon was imaged twice: once after distending the colon with air and a second time after distending the colon with water. A total of 50 patients, who had been referred to colonoscopy for a suspected colorectal pathology were randomized into water- distention (N  25) and air-distention (N  25) groups. A contrast-enhanced T1-weighted three-dimensional volume interpolated breath-hold (VIBE) sequence was collected. Comparative analysis was based on qualitative ratings of image quality and bowel distention, as well as contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) measurements for the colonic wall with respect to the colonic lumen. In addition, patient acceptance was evaluated.
Results: Inflammatory changes and colorectal masses were correctly identified on MRC in eight patients each. One 4-mm polyp identified at colonoscopy was missed on waterdistended MRC. There were no false positive findings. No significant differences were found between air- and waterdistention regarding discomfort levels and image quality. The presence of air in the colonic lumen was not associated with susceptibility artifacts. CNR of the contrast-enhanced colonic wall, as well as bowel distention, were superior on air-distended three-dimensional data sets.
Conclusion: MRC can be performed using either water or air for colonic distention. Both techniques permit assessment of the colonic wall and identification of colorectal masses. While discomfort levels are similar for both agents, MRC with air provides higher CNR and better colonic distention.

Background: The purpose of this pilot study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of MR colonography (MRC) without bowel cleansing regarding its ability to quantify inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In addition, patient acceptance was compared with conventional colonoscopy (CC).
Methods: In all, 29 patients with IBD (17 ulcerative colitis; 12 Crohn’s disease) were included. While CC was performed after bowel cleansing as the gold standard, MRC was based on a fecal tagging technique and performed 48–72 hours prior to CC. The presence of inflammation in each of 7 ileocolonic segments was rated for every procedure. Patients evaluated both modalities and dedicated aspects of the examination according to a 10-point-scale (1  good, 10  poor acceptance). Furthermore, preferences for future examinations were investigated.
Results: Inflammatory segments were found by means of CC in 23 and by MRC in 14 patients. Overall sensitivity and specificity of MRC in a segment-based detection were 32% and 88%, respectively. Concerning severely inflamed segments, sensitivity increased to 53% for MRC. Overall acceptance of CC was significantly higher compared to MRC (mean value (mv) for MRT  6.0; CC  4.1; P  0.003). For MRC, the placement of the rectal tube (mv  7.3), and for CC bowel purgation (mv  6.5), were rated as the most unpleasant. A total of 67% of patients voted for CC as the favorable tool for future examinations.
Conclusions: The presented data indicate that ‘fecal tagging MRC’ is not suitable for an adequate quantification of inflammatory diseases of the large bowel. Furthermore, overall acceptance of endoscopic colonoscopy was superior to MRC.

Purpose: To evaluate image subtraction for the detection of colonic pathologies in a dark-lumen MR colonography exam.
Materials and Methods: A total of 20 patients (12 males; 8 females; mean 51.4 years of age) underwent MR colonography after standard cleansing and a rectal water enema on a 1.5-T whole-body MR system. After suppression of peristaltic motion, native and Gd-contrast-enhanced three-dimensional T1-w gradient echo images were acquired in the coronal plane. Two radiologists analyzed the MR data sets in consensus on two separate occasions, with and without the subtracted images for lesion detection, and assessed the value of the subtracted data set on a five-point Likert scale (1  very helpful to 5  very unhelpful). All imaging results were compared with endoscopy.
Results: Without subtracted images, MR-colonography detected a total of five polyps, two inflammatory lesions, and one carcinoma in eight patients, which were all verified by endoscopy. Using subtraction, an additional polyp was found, and readout time was significantly shorter (6:41 vs. 7:39 minutes; P [1] 0.05). In two patients, endoscopy detected a flat adenoma and a polyp (0.4 cm) that were missed in the MR exam. Sensitivity and specificity without subtraction were 0.67/1.0, and 0.76/1.0 with the subtracted images, respectively. Subtraction was assessed as helpful in all exams (mean value 1.8 0.5; Likert scale).
Conclusion:We consider subtraction of native from contrast- enhanced dark-lumen MR colonography data sets as a beneficial supplement to the exam.

Purpose: To assess colonic anastomoses in patients after surgical treatment by means of MR colonography (MRC) in comparison with conventional colonoscopy (CC).
Materials and Methods: A total of 39 patients who had previously undergone colonic resection and end-to-endanastomosis were included in the study. MRI was based on a dark-lumen approach. Contrast-enhanced T1-weighted (T1w) three-dimensional (3D) images were collected following the rectal administration of water for colonic distension. The MRC data were evaluated by two radiologists. The criteria employed to evaluate the anastomoses included bowel wall thickening and increased contrast uptake in this region. Furthermore, all other colonic segments were assessed for the presence of pathologies.
Results: In 23 and 20 patients the anastomosis was rated to be normal by MRC and CC, respectively. In three patients CC revealed a slight inflammation of the anastomosis that was missed by MRI. A moderate stenosis of the anastomosis without inflammation was detected by MRC in five patients, which was confirmed by CC. In the remaining 11 patients a relevant pathology of the anastomosis was diagnosed by both MRC and CC. Recurrent tumor was diagnosed in two patients with a history of colorectal carcinoma. In the other nine patients inflammation of the anastomosis was seen in seven with Crohn’s disease (CD) and two with ulcerative colitis. MRC did not yield any falsepositive findings, resulting in an overall sensitivity/specificity for the assessment of the anastomosis of 84%/100%.
Conclusion: MRC represents a promising alternative to CC for the assessment of colonic anastomoses in patients with previous colonic resection.

Purpose: To assess the clinical relevance of dark-lumen MR colonography (MRC) for the detection of colorectal lesions using conventional colonoscopy (CC) and histopathologic examinations as reference standard.
Materials and Methods: A total of 72 patients underwent MRC and CC. MRC was performed using a contrast-enhanced high spatial resolution T1 weighted 3D volumetric interpolated breathhold examination (VIBE)-sequence. All removed colorectal lesions were evaluated by an experienced pathologist.
Results: CC confirmed 65 polyps less than 5mmin diameter. Non of those lesions could be detected using MRC. Just two (4%) of the 49 removed lesions smaller than 5 mm showed signs of dysplasia. Additionally, CC confirmed 25 polyps between 6–15 mm in diameter (MRC 22). All those 25 lesions were removed in CC. Only four (16%) of those polyps showed signs of dysplasia and malignancy (11, 13, 13 and 15 mm).
Conclusion: Dark-lumen MRC failed to detect all polyps smaller than 5 mm in diameter which are generally not clinically relevant at the moment of their detection and thus can be kept under surveillance. However, MRC as a noninvasive imaging modality is a promising alternative to CC in the detection of clinically relevant polyps larger than 5 mm in diameter.

The aim of the study was to evaluate the utility of dark-lumen MR colonography (MRC) for the assessment of extra-colonic organs. Three hundred seventy-five subjects with suspected colonic disease underwent a complete MRC examination. MRC data were evaluated by two radiologists in a blinded fashion. In addition to the large bowel, the extra-intestinal organs from the lung bases to the pelvis were assessed for the presence of pathologies. All findings were divided into known or unknown findings and therapeutically relevant or irrelevant findings. If deemed necessary, other diagnostic imaging tests to further assess those findings were performed. In total, 510 extracolonic findings were found in 260 (69%) of the 375 subjects. Known extra-colonic findings were found in 140 subjects (54%) and unknown findings in 120 subjects (46%). Thirty-one (12%) of the 260 subjects had therapeutically relevant findings (45 findings); 229 patients (88%) had irrelevant findings (465 findings). Dark-lumen MRC is a useful tool not only for the assessment of the entire colon, but also for the evaluation of extra-colonic organs. Thus, intra- and extra-colonic pathologies can be diagnosed within the same examination.

Recent improvements in hardware and software, lack of side effects, as well as diagnostic accuracy make magnetic resonance imaging a natural candidate for preventative imaging. Thus, the purpose of the study was to evaluate the feasibility of a comprehensive 60-min MR-based screening examination in healthy volunteers and a limited number of patients with known target disease. In ten healthy volunteers (7 men, 3 women; mean age, 32.4 years) and five patients (4 men, 1 woman; mean age, 56.2 years) with proven target disease we evaluated the performance of a comprehensive MR screening strategy by combining well-established organbased MR examination components encompassing the brain, the arterial system, the heart, the lungs, and the colon. All ten volunteers and five patients tolerated the comprehensive MR examination well. The mean in-room time was 63 min. In one volunteer, insufficient colonic cleansing on the part of the volunteer diminished the diagnostic reliability of MR colonography. All remaining components of the comprehensive MR examination were considered diagnostic in all volunteers and patients. In the five patients, the examination revealed the known pathologies [aneurysm of the anterior communicating artery (n=1), renal artery stenosis (n=1), myocardial infarct (n=1), and colonic polyp (n=2)]. The outlined MR screening strategy encompassing the brain, the arterial system, the heart, the lung, and the colon is feasible. Further studies have to show that MR-based screening programs are cost-effective in terms of the life-years saved.

Purpose: To assess whether the detection of colorectal lesions can be improved using high spatial resolution VIBE imaging.
Materials and Methods: 48 patients underwent same-day dark lumen MR colonography (MRC) and conventional colonoscopy (CC) as the standard for the detection of colorectal masses. MRC was performed using contrast-enhanced standard and high spatial resolution T1-weighted 3D VIBE sequences. The findings and the image quality of the standard and high spatial resolution VIBE sequences were compared qualitatively and quantitatively. The findings of both sequences regarding colorectal lesions were compared to those of a subsequently performed colonoscopy.
Results: The high spatial resolution VIBE sequence significantly improved the quantitative image quality (CNR 54.0 vs. 36.8). However, high spatial resolution VIBE imaging did not detect more colorectal lesions than the standard VIBE sequence. In addition, none of the sequences employed was able to detect lesions with a diameter of less than 5mm (CC 40 lesions). However, 13 colorectal lesions with a diameter of greater than 5mm were detected by both sequences (CC 15).
Conclusion: High spatial resolution VIBE imaging did not improve the detection of colorectal masses and MRC fails to detect colorectal lesions with a diameter of less than 5 mm.