Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

MR colonography with fecal tagging: barium vs. barium ferumoxsil

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. 1H MRS Assessment of Hepatic Fat Content: Comparison Between Normal- and Excess-weight Children and Adolescents

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Perioperative Colonic Evaluation in Patients with Rectal Cancer; MR Colonography Versus Standard Care

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Preoperative evaluation of synchronous colorectal cancer using MR colonography

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Mesenteric Lymphadenitis and Terminal Ileitis is Associated With Yersinia Infection: A Meta-analysis

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Flying fattens and swimming slims - the secret of the mermaid

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Body weight and metabolic risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes on a self-selected high-protein low-carbohydrate diet

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Cardiac hypoxic resistance and decreasing lactate during maximum apnea in elite breath hold divers

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Both magnetic resonance (MR) and computed tomographic (CT) colonography are useful for colon examination. With sensitivities close to those for conventional colonoscopy (CC) for polyps, colonography has been proposed as an alternative to diagnostic CC. MR colonography (MRC) with fecal tagging may be a method of gaining further patient acceptance and widespread use, but the method has to be optimized. The aim of our study was to evaluate the quality of a new contrast agent mixture and to validate a new method for evaluating the tagging efficiency of contrast agents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients referred to CC underwent dark lumen MRC prior to the colonoscopy. Two groups of patients received two different oral contrast agents (barium sulfate and barium sulfate/ferumoxsil) as a laxative-free fecal tagging prior to the MRC. After MRC, the contrast agent was rated qualitatively (with the standard method using contrast-to-wall ratio) and subjectively (using a visual analog scale [VAS]) by three different blinded observers.

RESULTS: Evaluated both qualitatively and subjectively, the tagging efficiency of barium sulfate/ferumoxsil was significantly better (P < .05) than barium sulfate alone. The VAS method for evaluating the tagging efficiency of contrast agents showed a high correlation (observer II, r = 0.91) to the standard method using contrast-to-wall ratio and also a high interclass correlation (observer II and III = 0.89/0.85). MRC found 1 of 22 (5%) polyps <6 mm, 2 of 3 (67%) polyps 6-10 mm, and 2 of 2 (100%) polyps >10 mm.

CONCLUSION: MRC with fecal tagging using barium sulfate/ferumoxsil as contrast agent will give better overall assessment of the colon wall compared to barium sulfate alone. Furthermore, the VAS method of evaluating fecal tagging efficiency correlated with the standard method of calculating the contrast-to-wall ratio.

Original languageEnglish
JournalAcademic Radiology
Volume15
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)576-83
Number of pages8
ISSN1076-6332
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2008

    Research areas

  • Barium Sulfate, Colonography, Computed Tomographic, Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis, Contrast Media, Feces, Female, Ferrosoferric Oxide, Gadolinium DTPA, Humans, Iron, Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods, Magnetite Nanoparticles, Male, Oxides, Siloxanes

ID: 59401577