497 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12601201)
1. Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography.
Yee J; Kumar NN; Hung RK; Akerkar GA; Kumar PR; Wall SD
Radiology; 2003 Mar; 226(3):653-61. PubMed ID: 12601201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. CT colonography: value of scanning in both the supine and prone positions.
Chen SC; Lu DS; Hecht JR; Kadell BM
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1999 Mar; 172(3):595-9. PubMed ID: 10063842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Supine/left decubitus scanning: a valuable alternative to supine/prone scanning in CT colonography.
Gryspeerdt SS; Herman MJ; Baekelandt MA; van Holsbeeck BG; Lefere PA
Eur Radiol; 2004 May; 14(5):768-77. PubMed ID: 14986055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. CT colonography: colonic distention improved by dual positioning but not intravenous glucagon.
Morrin MM; Farrell RJ; Keogan MT; Kruskal JB; Yam CS; Raptopoulos V
Eur Radiol; 2002 Mar; 12(3):525-30. PubMed ID: 11870464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Characterization of lesions missed on interpretation of CT colonography using a 2D search method.
Gluecker TM; Fletcher JG; Welch TJ; MacCarty RL; Harmsen WS; Harrington JR; Ilstrup D; Wilson LA; Corcoran KE; Johnson CD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2004 Apr; 182(4):881-9. PubMed ID: 15039159
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [CT-colonography with the 16-slice CT for the diagnostic evaluation of colorectal neoplasms and inflammatory colon diseases].
Röttgen R; Schröder RJ; Lorenz M; Herbel A; Fischbach F; Herzog H; Lopez-Häninnen E; Gutberlet M; Hoffmann K; Helmig K; Felix R
Rofo; 2003 Oct; 175(10):1384-91. PubMed ID: 14556108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. False-negative results at multi-detector row CT colonography: multivariate analysis of causes for missed lesions.
Park SH; Ha HK; Kim MJ; Kim KW; Kim AY; Yang DH; Lee MG; Kim PN; Shin YM; Yang SK; Myung SJ; Min YI
Radiology; 2005 May; 235(2):495-502. PubMed ID: 15770042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Deformable registration of supine and prone colons for computed tomographic colonography.
Suh JW; Wyatt CL
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2009; 33(6):902-11. PubMed ID: 19940658
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Efficient computerized polyp detection for CT colonography.
Li H; Pineau B; Santago P
J Digit Imaging; 2005 Mar; 18(1):55-65. PubMed ID: 15645333
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Volumetric analysis of colonic distention according to patient position at CT colonography: diagnostic value of the right lateral decubitus series.
Pickhardt PJ; Bakke J; Kuo J; Robbins JB; Lubner MG; del Rio AM; Kim DH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Dec; 203(6):W623-8. PubMed ID: 25415727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. CT colonography using 16-MDCT in the evaluation of colorectal cancer.
Chung DJ; Huh KC; Choi WJ; Kim JK
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2005 Jan; 184(1):98-103. PubMed ID: 15615957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Registration of central paths and colonic polyps between supine and prone scans in computed tomography colonography: pilot study.
Li P; Napel S; Acar B; Paik DS; Jeffrey RB; Beaulieu CF
Med Phys; 2004 Oct; 31(10):2912-23. PubMed ID: 15543800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of colonic distention on superiority of supine versus prone views in screening computed tomographic colonography.
Michel SJ; Pickhardt PJ; Kim DH; Taylor AJ
Clin Imaging; 2007; 31(5):325-8. PubMed ID: 17825740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Quantitative assessment of colonic movement between prone and supine patient positions during CT colonography.
Punwani S; Halligan S; Tolan D; Taylor SA; Hawkes D
Br J Radiol; 2009 Jun; 82(978):475-81. PubMed ID: 19124562
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Region-based supine-prone correspondence for the reduction of false-positive CAD polyp candidates in CT colonography.
Näppi J; Okamura A; Frimmel H; Dachman A; Yoshida H
Acad Radiol; 2005 Jun; 12(6):695-707. PubMed ID: 15935968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Colorectal cancer: role of CT colonography in preoperative evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy.
Neri E; Giusti P; Battolla L; Vagli P; Boraschi P; Lencioni R; Caramella D; Bartolozzi C
Radiology; 2002 Jun; 223(3):615-9. PubMed ID: 12034925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients.
Fletcher JG; Johnson CD; Welch TJ; MacCarty RL; Ahlquist DA; Reed JE; Harmsen WS; Wilson LA
Radiology; 2000 Sep; 216(3):704-11. PubMed ID: 10966698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Polyp detection at 3-dimensional endoluminal computed tomography colonography: sensitivity of one-way fly-through at 120 degrees field-of-view angle.
Pickhardt PJ; Schumacher C; Kim DH
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2009; 33(4):631-5. PubMed ID: 19638863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Virtual colon dissection with CT colonography compared with axial interpretation and conventional colonoscopy: preliminary results.
Hoppe H; Quattropani C; Spreng A; Mattich J; Netzer P; Dinkel HP
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2004 May; 182(5):1151-8. PubMed ID: 15100110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. CT colonography: single- versus multi-detector row imaging.
Hara AK; Johnson CD; MacCarty RL; Welch TJ; McCollough CH; Harmsen WS
Radiology; 2001 May; 219(2):461-5. PubMed ID: 11323473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
