Advertisement

Cross-Sectional Imaging of the Large Bowel

  • Diego R. Martin
  • Ming Yang
  • Paul Hamilton

Abstract

There has been considerable evolution of imaging techniques applied to visualization of pathology related to the large bowel. As recently as 10–15 yr ago, the predominant technique for colon imaging depended on plain film radiography. More recently, technological developments have facilitated use of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and ultrasound. Plain radiography is now considered to be of limited relative value, and generally, a test having low diagnostic yield. Radiography in combination with rectally administered contrast agents has been found useful for assessing mucosal and structural abnormalities. Optimal technique uses double-contrast barium enema, where a combination of a positive contrast, barium, thinly coats the intestinal mucosal surface, while the lumen is distended with a negative contrast, air, which is insufflated transrectally. In order to achieve effective coating of the entire colon, the patient is required to perform a variety of maneuvers while on the imaging table. There is exhaustive review of plain film and double-contrast radiography techniques in the literature, and this chapter will instead concentrate on newer state-of-the-art imaging based on CT and MR.

Keywords

Compute Tomography Acute Appendicitis Large Bowel Compute Tomography Colonography Pseudomembranous Colitis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Berland LL, & Smith JK. Multidetector-array CT: once again, technology creates new opportunities. Radiology, 209 (1998) 327–329.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hu H, He HD, Foley WD, Fox SH. Four multidetector-row helical CT: image quality and volume coverage speed. Radiology, 215 (2000) 55–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rubin GD. Data explosion: the challenge of multidetector-row CT. Eur. J. Radiol., 36 (2000) 74–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stoll E, Stern C, Stucki P, Wildermuth S. A new filtering algorithm for medical magnetic resonance and computer tomography images. J. Digit. Imaging, 12 (1999) 23–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McFarland EG, Brink JA, Loh J, et al. Visualization of colorectal polyps with spiral CT colography: evaluation of processing parameters with perspective volume rendering. Radiology, 205 (1997) 701–707.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hopper KD, lyriboz AT, Wise SW, Neuman JD, Mauger DT, Kasales CJ. Mucosal detail at CT virtual reality: surface versus volume rendering. Radiology, 214 (2000) 517–522.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fishman EK, Horton KM, Urban BA. Multidetector CT angiography in the evaluation of pancreatic carcinoma: preliminary observations. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., 24 (2000) 849–853.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reed JE, Johnson CD. Automatic segmentation, tissue characterization, and rapid diagnosis enhancements to the computed tomographie colonography analysis workstation. J. Digit. Imaging, 10 (1997) 70–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brown SJ, Hayball MP, Coulden RA. Impact of motion artefact on the measurement of coronary calcium score. Br. J. Radiol., 73 (2000) 956–962.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thoeni RF. Colorectal cancer. Radiologic staging. Radiol. Clin. N. Am., 35 (1997) 457–485.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lupetin AR, Cammisa BA, Beckman I, et al. Spiral CT during arterial portography. Radiographics, 16 (1996) 723–743.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    D’Asseler Y, Koole M, Van Laere K, et al. PACS and multimodality in medical imaging. Technol. Health Care, 8 (2000) 35–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Foord KD. PACS workstation respecification: display, data flow, system integration, and environmental issues, derived from analysis of the Conquest Hospital pre-DICOM PACS experience. Eur. Radiol., 9 (1999) 1161–1169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rex DK, Vining D, Kopecky KK. An initial experience with screening for colon polyps using spiral CT with and without CT colography (virtual colonoscopy). Gastrointest. Endosc., 50 (1999) 309–313.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rogalla P, Bender A, Bick U, Huitema A, Terwisscha van Scheltinga J, Hamm B. Tissue transition projection (TTP) of the intestines. Eur. Radiol., 10 (2000) 806–810.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ahlquist DA, Johnson CD. Screening by CT colonography: too early to pass judgment on a nascent technology. Gastrointest. Endosc., 50 (1999) 437–440.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bauerfeind P, Luboldt W, Debatin JF. Virtual colonography. Baillieres Best Pract. Res. Clin. Gastroenterol., 13 (1999) 59–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Callstrom MR, Johnson CD, Fletcher JG, et al. Ct colonography without cathartic preparation: feasibility study. Radiology, 219 (2001) 693–698.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chen SC, Lu DS, Hecht JR, Kadell BM. CT colonography: value of scanning in both the supine and prone positions. Am. J. Roentgenol., 172 (1999) 595–599.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dachman AH, Kuniyoshi JK, Boyle CM, et al. CT colonography with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps. Am. J. Roentgenol., 171 (1998) 989–995.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dave SB, Wang G, Brown BP, McFarland EG, Zhang Z, Vannier MW. Straightening the colon with curved cross sections: an approach to CT colonography. Acad. Radiol., 6 (1999) 398–410.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Welch T.J, et al. Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients. Radiology, 216 (2000) 704–711.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE, et al. Reducing data size and radiation dose for CT colonography. Am. J. Roentgenol., 168 (1997) 1181–1184.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hara AK, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ, McCollough CH, Harmsen WS. CT colonography: single-versus multi-detector row imaging. Radiology, 219 (2001) 461–465.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Johnson CD, Hara AK, Reed JE. Computed tomographic colonography (Virtual colonoscopy): a new method for detecting colorectal neoplasms. Endoscopy, 29 (1997) 454–461.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Johnson CD, Dachman AH. CT colonography: the next colon screening examination? Radiology, 216 (2000) 331–341.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Macari M, Berman P, Dicker M, Milano A, Megibow AJ. Usefulness of CT colonography in patients with incomplete colonoscopy. Am. J. Roentgenol., 173 (1999) 561–564.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rogalla P, Meiri N, Ruckert JC, Hamm B. Colonography using multislice CT. Eur. J. Radiol., 36 (2000) 81–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rubin DT, Dachman AH. Virtual colonoscopy: a novel imaging modality for colorectal cancer. Curr. Oncol. Rep., 3 (2001) 88–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tafazoli F, Taylor J, McFarland EG, Gianfelice D, Lepanto L, Reinhold C. New imaging techniques for the evaluation of gastrointestinal diseases. Can. J. Gastroenterol., 14 (Suppl D) (2000) 163D - 180D.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Valev V, Wang G, Vannier MW. Techniques of CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). Crit. Rev. Biomed. Eng., 27 (1999) 1–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chung JJ, Semelka RC, Martin DR, Marcos HB. Colon diseases: MR evaluation using combined T2-weighted single-shot echo train spin-echo and gadolinium-enhanced spoiled gradient-echo sequences. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging, 12 (2000) 297–305.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Semelka RC, Marcos HB. Polyposis syndromes of the gastrointestinal tract: MR findings. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging, 11 (2000) 51–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Shoenut JP, Semelka RC, Silverman R, Yaffe CS, Micflikier AB. Magnetic resonance imaging in inflammatory bowel disease. J. Clin. Gastroenterol., 17 (1993) 73–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Shoenut JP, Semelka RC, Magro CM, Silverman R, Yaffe CS, Micflikier AB. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopy in distinguishing the type and severity of inflammatory bowel disease. J. Clin. Gastroenterol., 19 (1994) 31–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Marcos HB, Semelka RC. Evaluation of Crohn’s disease using half-fourier RARE and gadoli nium-enhanced SGE sequences: initial results. Magn. Reson. Imaging, 18 (2000) 263–268.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Martin DR, Semelka RC. MR imaging of pancreatic masses. Magn. Reson. Imaging Clin. N. Am., 8 (2000) 787–812.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sachs TM, Applebaum H, Touran T, Taber P, Darakjian A, Colleti P. Use of MRI in evaluation of anorectal anomalies. J. Pediatr. Surg., 25 (1990) 817–821.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    O’Donovan AN, Somers S, Farrow R, Mernagh JR, Sridhar S. MR imaging of anorectal Crohn disease: a pictorial essay. Radiographics, 17 (1997) 101–107.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Paley MR, Ros PR. MRI of the rectum: non-neoplastic disease. Eur. Radiol., 8 (1998) 3–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rivera M, Vaquero JJ, Santos A, Ruiz-Cabello J, del Pozo F. MRI visualization of small structures using improved surface coils. Magn. Reson. Imaging, 16 (1998) 157–166.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Schenck JF, Hart HR, Jr, Foster TH, Edelstein WA, Hussain MA. High resolution magnetic resonance imaging using surface coils. Magn. Reson. Annu., (1986) 123–160.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Martin DR, Yang M, Thomasson D, Acheson C. MR colonography development of optimized method with ex vivo and in vivo systems. Radiology, 225 (2002) 597–602.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cianfarani S, Vitale S, Stanhope R, Boscherini B. Imperforate anus, bilateral hydronephrosis, bilateral undescended testes and pituitary hypoplasia: a variant of Hall-Pallister syndrome or a new syndrome. Acta. Paediatr., 84 (1995) 1322–1324.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Estrada RL, Mindelzun RE. The retropancreatic colon: a congenital anomaly. Abdom. Imaging., 22 (1997) 426–428.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Herman TE, Coplen D, Skinner M. Congenital short colon with imperforate anus (pouch colon). Report of a case. Pediatr. Radiol., 30 (2000) 243–246.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Inoue Y, Nakamura H. Adenocarcinoma arising in colonic duplication cysts with calcification: CT findings of two cases. Abdom. Imaging, 23 (1998) 135–137.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Pfluger T, Czekalla R, Koletzko S, Munsterer O, Willemsen UF, Hahn K. MRI and radiographic findings in Currarino’s triad. Pediatr. Radiol., 26 (1996) 524–527.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Freeman AH. CT and bowel disease. Br. J. Radiol., 74 (2001) 4–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Tarjan Z, Zagoni T, Gyorke T, Mester A, Karlinger K, Mako EK. Spiral CT colonography in inflammatory bowel disease. Eur. J. Radiol., 35 (2000) 193–198.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Durno CA, Sherman P, Williams T, Shuckett B, Dupuis A, Griffiths AM. Magnetic resonance imaging to distinguish the type and severity of pediatric inflammatory bowel diseases. J. Pediatr. Gastroenterol. Nutr., 30 (2000) 170–174.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kettritz U, Shoenut JP, Semelka RC. MR imaging of the gastrointestinal tract. Magn. Reson. Imaging Clin. N. Am., 3 (1995) 87–98.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Semelka RC, Shoenut JP, Silverman R, Kroeker MA, Yaffe CS, Micflikier AB. Bowel disease: prospective comparison of CT and 1.5-T pre-and postcontrast MR imaging with T1-weighted fat-suppressed and breath-hold FLASH sequences. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging, 1 (1991) 625–632.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Rieber A, Wruk D, Potthast S, et al. Diagnostic imaging in Crohn’s disease: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and conventional imaging methods. Int. J. Colorectal. Dis., 15 (2000) 176–181.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sabir N, Sungurtekin U, Erdem E, Nessar M. Magnetic resonance imaging with rectal Gd-DTPA: new tool for the diagnosis of perianal fistula. Int. J. Colorectal. Dis., 15 (2000) 317–322.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Fishman EK, Kavuru M, Jones B, et al. Pseudomembranous colitis: CT evaluation of 26 cases. Radiology, 180 (1991) 57–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Hamrick KM, Tishler JM, Schwartz ML, Koslin DB, Han SY. The CT findings in pseudomembranous colitis. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph., 13 (1989) 343–346.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Horton KM, Corl FM, Fishman EK. CT evaluation of the colon: inflammatory disease. Radio graphics, 20 (2000) 399–418.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kawamoto S, Horton KM, Fishman EK. Pseudomembranous colitis: can CT predict which patients will need surgical intervention? J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., 23 (1999) 79–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kawamoto S, Horton KM, Fishman EK. Pseudomembranous colitis: spectrum of imaging findings with clinical and pathologic correlation. Radiographics, 19 (1999) 887–897.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Megibow Ai, Streiter ML, Balthazar EJ, Bosniak, MA. Pseudomembranous colitis: diagnosis by computed tomography. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., 8 (1984) 281–283.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Wilcox CM, Gryboski D, Fernandez M, Stahl W. Computed tomographic findings in pseudomembranous colitis: an important clue to the diagnosis. South. Med. J., 88 (1995) 929–933.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Yankes JR, Baker ME, Cooper C, Garbutt J. CT appearance of focal pseudomembranous colitis. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., 12 (1988) 394–396.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Chintapalli KN, Chopra S, Ghiatas AA, Escola CC, Fields SF, Dodd GD, 3rd. Diverticulitis versus colon cancer: differentiation with helical CT findings. Radiology, 210 (1999) 429–435.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Jang HJ, Lim HK, Lee SJ, Choi SH, Lee MH, Choi MH. Acute diverticulitis of the cecum and ascending colon: thin-section helical CT findings. Am. J. Roentgenol., 172 (1999) 601–604.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Luboldt W, Luz O, Vonthein R, et al. Three-dimensional double-contrast MR colonography: a display method simulating double-contrast barium enema. Am. J. Roentgenol., 176 (2001) 930–932.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Marinella MA, Mustafa M. Acute diverticulitis in patients 40 years of age and younger. Am. J. Emerg. Med., 18 (2000) 140–142.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Minardi Ai, Jr, Johnson LW, Sehon JK, Zibari GB, McDonald JC. Diverticulitis in the young patient. Am. Surg., 67 (2001) 458–461.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Rao PM, Rhea JT. Colonic diverticulitis: evaluation of the arrowhead sign and the inflamed diverticulum for CT diagnosis. Radiology, 209 (1998) 775–779.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Rao PM. CT of diverticulitis and alternative conditions. Semin. Ultrasound CT MR, 20 (1999) 86–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Urban BA, Fishman EK. Targeted helical CT of the acute abdomen: appendicitis, diverticulitis, and small bowel obstruction. Semin. Ultrasound CT MR, 21 (2000) 20–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Liu CH, Chuang CK, Chu SH, et al. Enterovesical fistula: experiences with 41 cases in 12 years. Changgeng Yi Xue Za Zhi, 22 (1999) 598–603.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Netri G, Verbo A, Coco C, et al. The role of surgical treatment in colon diverticulitis: indications and results. Ann. Ital. Chir., 71 (2000) 209–214.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    White TB, Allen HA, 3rd, Ives CE. Portal and mesenteric vein gas in diverticulitis: CT findings. Am. J. Roentgenol., 171 (1998) 525–526.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Kawamura YJ, Sugamata Y, Yoshino K, et al. Appendico-ileo-vesical fistula. J. Gastroenterol., 33 (1998) 868–871.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Birjawi GA, Haddad MC, Zantout HM, Uthman SZ. Primary epiploic appendagitis: a report of two cases. Clin. Imaging, 24 (2000) 207–209.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Hiller N, Berelowitz D, Hadas-Halpern I. Primary epiploic appendagitis: clinical and radiological manifestations. Isr. Med. Assoc. J., 2 (2000) 896–898.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Rao PM, Wittenberg J, Lawrason JN. Primary epiploic appendagitis: evolutionary changes in CT appearance. Radiology, 204 (1997) 713–717.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Sirvanci M, Tekelioglu MH, Duran C, Yardimci H, Onat L, Ozer K. Primary epiploic appendagitis: CT manifestations. Clin. Imaging, 24 (2000) 357–361.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Simon AM, Birnbaum BA, Jacobs JE. Isolated infarction of the cecum: CT findings in two patients. Radiology, 214 (2000) 513–516.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Ha HK, Rha SE, Kim AY, Auh YH. CT and MR diagnoses of intestinal ischemia. Semin. Ultrasound CT MR 21 (2000) 40–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Rademaker J. Veno-occlusive disease of the colon-CT findings. Eur. Radiol., 8 (1998) 1420–1421.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Rha SE, Ha HK, Lee SH, et al. CT and MR imaging findings of bowel ischemia from various primary causes. Radio graphics, 20 (2000) 29–42.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Applegate KE, Sivit CJ, Myers MT, Pschesang B. Using helical CT to diagnosis acute appendicitis in children: spectrum of findings. Am. J. Roentgenol., 176 (2001) 501–505.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Birnbaum BA, Wilson SR. Appendicitis at the millennium. Radiology, 215 (2000) 337–348.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Brice J. What should CT’s role be in pediatric appendicitis? Diagn. Imaging (San Franc), Suppl (2000) 21–23.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Daniels IR, Chisholm EM. Suspected acute appendicitis: is ultrasonography or computed tomography the preferred imaging technique? Eur. J. Surg., 166 (2000) 910.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Funaki B. Nonenhanced CT for suspected appendicitis. Radiology, 216 (2000) 916–918.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Hardin DM, Jr. Acute appendicitis: review and update. Am. Fam. Physician, 60 (1999) 2027–2034.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Karakas SP, Guelfguat M, Leonidas JC, Springer S, Singh SP. Acute appendicitis in children: comparison of clinical diagnosis with ultrasound and CT imaging. Pediatr. Radiol., 30 (2000) 94–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Lane MJ, Mindelzun RE. Appendicitis and its mimickers. Semin. Ultrasound CT MR, 20 (1999) 77–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Styrud J, Josephson T, Eriksson S. Reducing negative appendectomy: evaluation of ultrasonography and computer tomography in acute appendicitis. Int. J. Qual. Health Care, 12 (2000) 65–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Wise SW, Labuski MR, Kasales CJ, et al. Comparative assessment of CT and sonographic techniques for appendiceal imaging. Am. J. Roentgenol., 176 (2001) 933–941.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Geusens E, Vanhoenacker P, De Man R, Van Oost J, Verbanck J. Mucocele of the appendix. J. Belge Radiol., 77 (1994) 17–18.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Hinson FL, Ambrose NS. Pseudomyxoma peritonei. Br. J. Surg., 85 (1998) 1332–1339.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Low RN, Barone RM, Lacey C, Sigeti JS, Alzate GD, Sebrechts CP. Peritoneal tumor: MR imaging with dilute oral barium and intravenous gadolinium-containing contrast agents compared with unenhanced MR imaging and CT. Radiology, 204 (1997) 513–520.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Matsuoka, Y., Masumoto, T., Suzuki, K., et al. Pseudomyxoma retroperitonei. Eur. Radiol., 9 (1999) 457–459.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Sugarbaker, P.H., Ronnett, B.M., Archer, A., et al. Pseudomyxoma peritonei syndrome. Adv. Surg.,30 (1996) 233–280.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Yasar A, De Keulenaer B, Opdenakker G, Malbrain M. Pseudomyxoma peritonei in association with primary malignant tumor of the ovary and colon. J. Belge Radiol., 80 (1997) 233–234.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Zissin R, Gayer G, Kots E, Apter S, Peri M, Shapiro-Feinberg M. Imaging of mucocoele of the appendix with emphasis on the CT findings: a report of 10 cases. Clin. Radiol., 54 (1999) 826–832.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Zissin R, Gayer G, Fishman A, Edelstein E, Shapiro-Feinberg M. Synchronous mucinous tumors of the ovary and the appendix associated with pseudomyxoma peritonei: CT findings. Abdom. Imaging, 25 (2000) 311–316.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Beaulieu CF, Napel S, Daniel BL, et al. Detection of colonic polyps in a phantom model: implications for virtual colonoscopy data acquisition. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., 22 (1998) 656–663.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE. Colorectal lesions: evaluation with CT colography. Radiographics, 17 (1997) 1157–1167.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Williams SC, Peller PJ. Gardner’s syndrome. Case report and discussion of the manifestations of the disorder. Clin. Nucl. Med., 19 (1994) 668–670.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Scribano E, Loria G, Ascenti G, Cardia E, Molina D, Gaeta M. Turcot’s syndrome: a new case in the first decade of life. Abdom. Imaging, 20 (1995) 155–156.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Wimmer AP, Bouffard JP, Storms PR, Pilcher JA, Liang CY, DeGuide JJ. Primary colon cancer without gross mucosal tumor: unusual presentation of a common malignancy. South. Med. J., 91 (1998) 1173–1176.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Yeung KW, Kuo YT, Huang CL, Wu DK, Liu GC. Inflammatory/infectious diseases and neoplasms of colon. Evaluation with CT. Clin. Imaging, 22 (1998) 246–251.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Joosten FB, Jansen JB, Joosten HJ, Rosenbusch G. Staging of rectal carcinoma using MR double surface coil, MR endorectal coil, and intrarectal ultrasound: correlation with histopathologic findings. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., 19 (1995) 752–758.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Goldberg MA, Lee MJ, Fischman AJ, Mueller PR, Alpert NM, Thrall JH. Fluorodeoxyglucose PET of abdominal and pelvic neoplasms: potential role in oncologie imaging. Radiographies, 13 (1993) 1047–1062.Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Yoshioka, T., Fukuda, H., Fujiwara, T., et al. FDG PET evaluation of residual masses and regrowth of abdominal lymph node metastases from colon cancer compared with CT during chemotherapy. Clin. Nucl. Med., 24 (1999) 261–263.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Ahn, M.J., Park, Y.W., Han, D., et al. A case of primary intestinal T-cell lymphoma involving entire gastrointestinal tract: esophagus to rectum. Korean J. Intern. Med., 15 (2000) 245–249.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Frick MP, Salomonowitz E, Hanto DW, Gedgaudas-McClees K. CT of abdominal lymphoma after renal transplantation. Am. J. Roentgenol., 142 (1984) 97–99.Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Martin DR, Semelka RC, Chung JJ, Balci NC, Wilber K. Sequential use of gadolinium chelate and mangafodipir trisodium for the assessment of focal liver lesions: initial observations. Magn. Reson. Imaging, 18 (2000) 955–963.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Parker LA, Vincent LM, Ryan FP, Mittelstaedt CA. Primary lymphoma of the ascending colon: sonographic demonstration. J. Clin. Ultrasound, 14 (1986) 221–223.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Schmid C, Vazquez JJ, Diss TC, Isaacson PG. Primary B-cell mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma presenting as a solitary colorectal polyp. Histopathology, 24 (1994) 357–362.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Wyatt SH, Fishman EK, Hruban RH, Siegelman SS. CT of primary colonic lymphoma. Clin. Imaging, 18 (1994) 131–141.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Pelage JP, Soyer P, Boudiaf M, et al. Carcinoid tumors of the abdomen: CT features. Abdom. Imaging, 24 (1999) 240–245.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Semelka RC, Martin DR, Balci C, Lance T. Focal liver lesions: Comparison of dual-phase CT and multisequence multiplanar MR imaging including dynamic gadolinium enhancement. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging, 13 (2001) 397–401.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diego R. Martin
  • Ming Yang
  • Paul Hamilton

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations