Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Screening and Preventive Diagnosis with Radiological Imaging pp 183–214Cite as

Oncological Disease

  • Chapter

  • 783 Accesses

Part of the book series: Medical Radiology ((Med Radiol Diagn Imaging))

Abstract

Successful mammography screening has to keep the radiation exposure as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) to obtain high quality images with sufficient diagnostic information. Quality control in screening units has to cover all parts of the imaging chain like X-ray generation, Bucky and image receptor, film processing and viewing conditions. A nominated radiographer of the screening unit should be responsible for consistency tests which have to be performed daily and weekly (see Table 10.1). More complex measurements have to be undertaken either at acceptance, yearly or every six months covering the X-ray source (focal spot size, source to image distance, alignment of X-ray field, radiation leakage), tube voltage reproducibility and beam quality (Half Value Layer), automatic exposure control (reproducibility and security cut-off), tube voltage compensation, dosimetry and exposure time (Perry et al. 2006). Performance indicators are listed in Table 10.2.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   249.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • ACR (2003) Breast imaging reporting and data system atlas (BI-RADS atlas), 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • Britton PD, Flower CD, Freeman AH et al. (1997) Changing to core biopsy in an NHS breast screening unit. Clin Radiol 52:764–767

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burbank F (1997) Stereotactic breast biopsy of atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ: improved accuracy with a directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy instrument. Radiology 202:843–848

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fröhlich CP, Weigel C, Mohr M et al. (2007) Teleradiology and mammography screening: evaluation of a network with dedicated workstations for reporting. Fortschr Röntgenstr 179:137–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon PB (2002) Ultrasound for breast cancer screening and staging. Radiol Clin North Am 40(3):431–441

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laquement MA, Mitchell D, Hollingsworth AB (1999) Positive predictive value of the breast imaging reporting and data system. J Am Coll Surg 189:34–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehman C, Holt S, Peacock S et al. (2002) Use of the American College of Radiology BI-RADS Guidelines by community radiologists: concordance of assessments and recommendations assigned to screening mammograms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:15–20

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB et al. (1998) The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:34–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandelson MR, Oestreicher N, Porter PL et al. (2000) Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval-and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:1081–1087

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen M, McCombs MM, Ghandehari S et al. (1996) An update on core needle biopsy for radiologically detected breast lesions. Cancer 78:2340–2345

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C et al. (eds.) (2006) European Guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis, 4th edn. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisano ED, Fajardo LL, Tsimikas J et al. (1998) Rate of insufficient samples for fine-needle aspiration for nonpalpable breast lesions in a multicenter clinical trial: the Radiologic Diagnostic Oncology Group 5 study. Cancer 82:678–688

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisano MD, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al. (2005) Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 353:1773–1783

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thurfjell EL, Lernevall KA, Taube AAS (1994) Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 191:241–244

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wald J, Murphy P, Major P et al. (1995) UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening. BMJ 311:1189–1193

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wells CA (1995) Quality assurance in breast cancer screening cytology: a review of the literature and a report on the UK National Cytology Scheme. Eur J Cancer 31A:273–280

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

References

  • Chow WH, Devesa SS, Warren JL, Fraumeni JF Jr (1999) Rising incidence of renal cell cancer in the United States. Jama 281:1628–1631

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fergany AF, Hafez KS, Novick AC (2000) Long-term results of nephron sparing surgery for localized renal cell carcinoma: 10-year followup. J Urol 163:442–445

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Filipas D, Spix C, Schultz-Lampel D et al. (1999) Pilotstudie zur sonographischen Fruherkennung des Nierenzellkarzinoms. Radiologe 39:350–353

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Filipas D, Fichtner J, Spix C et al. (2000) Nephron-sparing surgery of renal cell carcinoma with a normal opposite kidney: long-term outcome in 180 patients. Urology 56:387–392

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Filipas D, Spix C, Schulz-Lampel D et al. (2002) Sonographisches Screening von Nierenzellkarzinomen. Radiologe 42:612–616

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Filipas D, Spix C, Schultz-Lampel D et al. (2003) Screening for renal cell carcinoma using ultrasonography: a feasibility study. BJU Int 91:595–599

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fujii Y, Ajima J, Oka K, Tosaka A, Takehara Y (1995) Benign renal tumors detected among healthy adults by abdominal ultrasonography. Eur Urol 27:124–127

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guinan PD, Vogelzang NJ, Fremgen AM et al. (1995) Renal cell carcinoma: tumor size, stage and survival. Members of the Cancer Incidence and End Results Committee. J Urol 153:901–903

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hermanek P, Schrott KM (1990) Evaluation of the new tumor, nodes and metastases classification of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 144:238–241; discussion 241–242

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jemal A, Murray T, Ward E et al. (2005) Cancer statistics, 2005. CA Cancer J Clin 55:10–30

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kauczor HU, Delorme S, Trost U (1992) Sonographie des Nierenzellkarzinoms. Radiologe 32:104–113

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Konnak JW, Grossman HB (1985) Renal cell carcinoma as an incidental finding. J Urol 134:1094–1096

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kremer H, Dobrinski W, Schreiber MA, Zollner N (1984) Sonographie des Abdomens als Screeningmethode. Ultraschall Med 5:272–276

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Labrie F, Candas B, Dupont A et al. (1999) Screening decreases prostate cancer death: first analysis of the 1988 Quebec prospective randomized controlled trial. Prostate 38:83–91

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lam JS, Shvarts O, Pantuck AJ (2004) Changing concepts in the surgical management of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 45:692–705

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lau WK, Blute ML, Weaver AL, Torres VE, Zincke H (2000) Matched comparison of radical nephrectomy vs nephron-sparing surgery in patients with unilateral renal cell carcinoma and a normal contralateral kidney. Mayo Clin Proc 75:1236–1242

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner SE, Hawkins CA, Blute ML et al. (1996) Disease outcome in patients with low stage renal cell carcinoma treated with nephron sparing or radical surgery. J Urol 155:1868–1873

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mihara S, Nagano K, Kuroda K et al. (1998) Efficacy of ultrasonic mass survey for abdominal cancer. J Med Syst 22:55–62

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pantuck AJ, Zisman A, Belldegrun AS (2001) The changing natural history of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 166:1611–1623

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Patard JJ, Shvarts O, Lam JS et al. (2004a) Safety and efficacy of partial nephrectomy for all T1 tumors based on an international multicenter experience. J Urol 171:2181–2185; quiz 2435

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Patard JJ, Tazi H, Bensalah K et al. (2004b) The changing evolution of renal tumours: a single center experience over a two-decade period. Eur Urol 45:490–493; discussion 493–494

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts RO, Bergstralh EJ, Katusic SK, Lieber MM, Jacobsen SJ (1999) Decline in prostate cancer mortality from 1980 to 1997, and an update on incidence trends in Olmsted County, Minnesota. J Urol 161:529–533

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith SJ, Bosniak MA, Megibow AJ, Hulnick DH, Horii SC, Raghavendra BN (1989) Renal cell carcinoma: earlier discovery and increased detection. Radiology 170:699–703

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spouge AR, Wilson SR, Wooley B (1996) Abdominal sonography in asymptomatic executives: prevalence of pathologic findings, potential benefits, and problems. J Ultrasound Med 15:763–767; quiz 769–770

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ueda T, Mihara Y (1987) Incidental detection of renal carcinoma during radiological imaging. Br J Urol 59:513–515

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

References Part I

  • Ahmed FE (2003) Colon cancer: prevalence, screening, gene expression and mutation, and risk factors and assessment. J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev 21:65–131

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aldridge AJ, Simson JN (2001) Histological assessment of colorectal adenomas by size. Are polyps less than 10 mm in size clinically important? Eur J Surg 167:777–781

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beaulieu CF, Jeffrey RB Jr, Karadi C et al. (1999) Display modes for CT colonography. Part II. Blinded comparison of axial CT and virtual endoscopic and panoramic endoscopic volume-rendered studies. Radiology 212:203–212

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bogoni L, Cathier P, Dundar M et al. (2005) Computer-aided detection (CAD) for CT colonography: a tool to address a growing need. Br J Radiol 78:S57–S62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burling D, Taylor SA, Halligan S et al. (2006) Automated insufflation of carbon dioxide for MDCT colonography: distention and patient experience compared with manual insufflation. Am J Roentgenol 186:96–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callstrom MR, Johnson CD, Fletcher JG et al. (2001) CT colonography without cathartic preparation: feasibility study. Radiology 219:693–698

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen SC, Lu DS, Hecht JR et al. (1999) CT colonography: value of scanning in both the supine and prone positions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:595–599

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chung DJ, Huh KC, Choi WJ et al. (2005) CT Colonography using 16-MDCT in the evaluation of colorectal cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:98–103

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cotton PB, Durkalski VL, Pineau BC et al. (2004) Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 291:1713–1719

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dachman AH, Kuniyoshi JK, Boyle CM et al. (1998) CT colonography with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:989–995

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fenlon HM, Ferrucci JT (1997) Virtual colonoscopy: what will the issues be? AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:453–458

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrucci JT (2001) Colon cancer screening with virtual colonoscopy: promise, polyps, politics. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:975–988

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL et al. (1999) CT colonography: potential pitfalls and problem-solving techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:1271–1278

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Welch TJ et al. (2000) Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients. Radiology 216:704–711

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gluecker T, Meuwly JY, Pescatore P et al. (2002) Effect of investigator experience in CT colonography. Eur Radiol 12:1405–1409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gluecker TM, Johnson CD, Harmsen WS et al. (2003) Colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography, colonoscopy, and double-contrast barium enema examination: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences. Radiology 227:378–384

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Graser A, Wintersperger BJ, Suess C et al. (2006) Dose reduction and image quality in MDCT colonography using tube current modulation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:695–701

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE et al. (1997) Detection of colorectal polyps with CT colography: initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity. Radiology 205:59–65

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hara AK, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL et al. (2001) CT colonography: single-versus multi-detector row imaging. Radiology 219:461–465

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe H, Quattropani C, Spreng A et al. (2004) Virtual colon dissection with CT colonography compared with axial interpretation and conventional colonoscopy: preliminary results. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:1151–1158

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C et al. (2003) Detection of colorectal lesions: lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 229:775–781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jemal A, Murray T, Ward E et al. (2005) Cancer statistics, 2005. CA Cancer J Clin 55:10–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CD, Dachman AH (2000) CT colonography: the next colon screening examination? Radiology 216:331–341

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, Wilson LA et al. (2003) Prospective blinded evaluation of computed tomographic colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 125:311–319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ et al. (2004) Comparison of the relative sensitivity of CT colonography and double-contrast barium enema for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2:314–321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson KT, Johnson CD, Anderson SM et al. (2004) CT colonography: determination of optimal CT technique using a novel colon phantom. Abdom Imaging 29:173–176

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson KT, Johnson CD, Fletcher JG et al. (2006) CT Colonography using 360° virtual dissection: a feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:90–95

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kahi CJ, Rex DK (2004) Current and future trends in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Metastasis Rev 23:137–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL et al. (2004a) Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 230:619–628

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL et al. (2004b) Comparison of Z-axis automatic tube current modulation technique with fixed tube current CT scanning of abdomen and pelvis. Radiology 232:347–353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J et al. (1996) Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecaloccult-blood test. Lancet 348:1467–1471

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laghi A, Iannaccone R, Mangiapane F et al. (2003) Experimental colonic phantom for the evaluation of the optimal scanning technique for CT colonography using a multidetector spiral CT equipment. Eur Radiol 13:459–466

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laks S, Macari M, Bini EJ (2004) Positional change in colon polyps at CT colonography. Radiology 231:761–766

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lefere PA, Gryspeerdt SS, Dewyspelaere J et al. (2002) Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT colonography: initial results polyp detection and patient acceptance. Radiology 224:393–403

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lefere P, Gryspeerdt S, Baekelandt M et al. (2004) Laxativefree CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:945–948

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lui YW, Macari M, Israel G et al. (2003) CT colonography data interpretation: effect of different section thicknesses-preliminary observations. Radiology 229:791–797

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Macari M, Megibow AJ. (2001) Pitfalls of using three-dimensional CT colonography with two-dimensional imaging correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:137–143

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Macari M, Milano A, Lavelle M et al. (2000) Comparison of time-efficient CT colonography with two-and threedimensional colonic evaluation for detecting colorectal polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:1543–1549

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Macari M, Lavelle M, Pedrosa I et al. (2001) Effect of different bowel preparations on residual fluid at CT colonography. Radiology 218:274–277

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Macari M, Bini EJ, Xue X et al. (2002) Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thin-section low-dose multidetector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection. Radiology 224:383–392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Macari M, Bini EJ, Jacobs SL et al. (2003) Filling defects at CT colonography: pseudo-and diminutive lesions (the good), polyps (the bad), flat lesions, masses, and carcinomas (the ugly). Radiographics 23:1073–1091

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Macari M, Bini EJ, Jacobs SL et al. (2004) Significance of missed polyps at CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:127–134

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR et al. (1993) Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med 328:1365–1371

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morson BC (1984) The evolution of colorectal carcinoma. Clin Radiol 35:425–431

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Muller AD, Sonnenberg A (1995) Protection by endoscopy against death from colorectal cancer. A case-control study among veterans. Arch Intern Med 155:1741–1748

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Muto T, Bussey HJ, Morson BC (1975) The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum. Cancer 36:2251–2270

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Obuchowski NA, Graham RJ, Baker ME et al. (2001) Ten criteria for effective screening: their application to multislice CT screening for pulmonary and colorectal cancers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:1357–1362

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I et al. (2003) Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 349:2191–2200

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I et al. (2004) Nonadenomatous polyps at CT colonography: prevalence, size distribution, and detection rates. Radiology 232:784–790

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Podolsky DK (2004) The AGA and future trends in Gastroenterology: CT colonography. Gastroenterology 127:985–986

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rajapaksa RC, Macari M, Bini EJ (2004) Prevalence and impact of extracolonic findings in patients undergoing CT colonography. J Clin Gastroenterol 38:767–771

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ransohoff DF, Sandler RS (2002) Clinical practice. Screening for colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 346:40–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rex DK (2002) Current colorectal cancer screening strategies: overview and obstacles to implementation. Rev Gastroenterol Disord 2(Suppl 1):S2–S11

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ristvedt SL, McFarland EG, Weinstock LB et al. (2003) Patient preferences for CT colonography, conventional colonoscopy, and bowel preparation. Am J Gastroenterol 98:578–585

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rockey DC, Koch J, Cello JP et al. (1998) Relative frequency of upper gastrointestinal and colonic lesions in patients with positive fecal occult-blood tests. N Engl J Med 339:153–159

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rockey DC, Koch J, Yee J et al. (2004) Prospective comparison of air-contrast barium enema and colonoscopy in patients with fecal occult blood: a pilot study. Gastrointest Endosc 60:953–958

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwiecki D et al. (2005) Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet 365:305–311

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Royster AP, Fenlon HM, Clarke PD et al. (1997) CT colonoscopy of colorectal neoplasms: two-dimensional and three-dimensional virtual-reality techniques with colonoscopic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:1237–1242

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmiegel W, Pox C, Adler G et al. (2004) S3-Guidelines Conference „Colorectal Carcinoma“ 2004. Z Gastroenterol 42:1129–1177

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spinzi G, Belloni G, Martegani A et al. (2001) Computed tomographic colonography and conventional colonoscopy for colon diseases: a prospective, blinded study. Am J Gastroenterol 96:394–400

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor SA, Halligan S, Bartram CI (2003a) CT colonography: methods, pathology and pitfalls. Clin Radiol 58:179–190

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor SA, Halligan S, Bartram CI et al. (2003b) Multi-detector row CT colonography: effect of collimation, pitch, and orientation on polyp detection in a human colectomy specimen. Radiology 229:109–118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor SA, Halligan S, Goh V et al. (2003c) Optimizing colonic distention for multi-detector row CT colonography: effect of hyoscine butylbromide and rectal balloon catheter. Radiology 229:99–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor SA, Halligan S, Burling D et al. (2004) CT colonography: effect of experience and training on reader performance. Eur Radiol 14:1025–1033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Florie J et al. (2004) CT colonography: feasibility of substantial dose reduction — comparison of medium to very low doses in identical patients. Radiology 232:611–620

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weissfeld JL, Schoen RE, Pinsky PF et al. (2005) Flexible sigmoidoscopy in the PLCO cancer screening trial: results from the baseline screening examination of a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 97:989–997

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wessling J, Fischbach R, Meier N et al. (2003) CT colonography: protocol optimization with multi-detector row CTstudy in an anthropomorphic colon phantom. Radiology 228:753–759

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winawer SJ (1999) Natural history of colorectal cancer. Am J Med 106:3S–6S

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winawer SJ (2005) Screening of colorectal cancer: progress and problems. Recent Results Cancer Res 166:231–244

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winawer SJ, Zauber AG (2001) Colonoscopic polypectomy and the incidence of colorectal cancer. Gut 48:753–754

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN et al. (1993) Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 329:1977–1981

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D et al. (2003) Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale — update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 124:544–560

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yasumoto T, Murakami T, Yamamoto H et al. (2006) Assessment of two 3D MDCT colonography protocols for observation of colorectal polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:85–89

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yee J (2002) CT colonography: examination prerequisites. Abdom Imaging 27:244–252

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yee J, Hung RK, Akerkar GA et al. (1999) The usefulness of glucagon hydrochloride for colonic distention in CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:169–172

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK et al. (2001) Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology 219:685–692

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yee J, Kumar NN, Hung RK et al. (2003) Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography. Radiology 226:653–661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yoshida H, Dachman AH (2005) CAD techniques, challenges, and controversies in computed tomographic colonography. Abdom Imaging 30:26–41

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zalis ME, Perumpillichira J, Del Frate C et al. (2003) CT colonography: digital subtraction bowel cleansing with mucosal reconstruction initial observations. Radiology 226:911–917

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

References Part II

  • Ajaj W, Ruehm SG, Ladd SC et al. (2007) Utility of darklumen MR colonography for the assessment of extracolonic organs. Eur Radiol 17:1574–1583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner DJ, Elliston CD (2004) Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiology 232:735–738

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Florie J, Jensch S, Nievelstein RA et al. (2007) MR colonography with limited bowel preparation compared with optical colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. Radiology 243:122–131

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hartmann D, Bassler B, Schilling D et al. (2006) Colorectal polyps: detection with dark-lumen MR colonography versus conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 238:143–149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuehle CA, Langhorst J, Ladd SC et al. (2007) MR colonography without bowel cleansing — a prospective cross-sectional study in a screening population. Gut 2007; epub ahead of print

    Google Scholar 

  • Luboldt W, Bauerfeind P, Pelkonen P et al. (1997) 3D MRI of the colon: methods and initial results. Rofo 167:252–256

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luboldt W, Debatin JF (1998) Virtual endoscopic colonography based on 3D MRI. Abdom Imaging 23:568–572

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saar B, Beer A, Rosch T et al. (2004) Magnetic resonance colonography: a promising new technique. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 6:389–394

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Radiology, University Hospitals - Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81373, Munich, Germany

    Karin Hellerhoff MD, Claudia Perlet MD, Thomas Schlossbauer MD & Anno Graser MD

  2. Department of Urology, Johannes-Gutenberg-University of Mainz, Medical School, Langenbeckstraße 1, 55101, Mainz, Germany

    Dragana Filipas MD, Sascha Pahernik MD & Joachim W. Thüroff MD (Professor and Chairman)

Authors
  1. Karin Hellerhoff MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claudia Perlet MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Schlossbauer MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dragana Filipas MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sascha Pahernik MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Joachim W. Thüroff MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Anno Graser MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Radiology, University Hospitals — Grosshadern and Innenstadt Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany

    Maximilian F. Reiser MD (Professor and Chairman) (Professor and Chairman)

  2. German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Gerhard van Kaick MD (Professor Emeritus) (Professor Emeritus)

  3. Department of Clinical Radiology University Hospital Mannheim Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany

    Christian Fink MD (Associate Professor Section Chief Cardiothoracic Imaging) & Stefan O. Schoenberg MD (Professor and Chairman) (Associate Professor Section Chief Cardiothoracic Imaging) &  (Professor and Chairman)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hellerhoff, K. et al. (2008). Oncological Disease. In: Reiser, M.F., van Kaick, G., Fink, C., Schoenberg, S.O. (eds) Screening and Preventive Diagnosis with Radiological Imaging. Medical Radiology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-49831-5_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-49831-5_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-23553-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49831-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation