146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17640320)
1. Surface visualization at CT colonography simulated colonoscopy: effect of varying field of view and retrograde view.
East JE; Saunders BP; Burling D; Boone D; Halligan S; Taylor SA
Am J Gastroenterol; 2007 Nov; 102(11):2529-35. PubMed ID: 17640320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Surface visualization at 3D endoluminal CT colonography: degree of coverage and implications for polyp detection.
Pickhardt PJ; Taylor AJ; Gopal DV
Gastroenterology; 2006 May; 130(6):1582-7. PubMed ID: 16697721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Uni- and bidirectional wide angle CT colonography: effect on missed areas, surface visualization, viewing time and polyp conspicuity.
East JE; Saunders BP; Boone D; Burling D; Halligan S; Taylor SA
Eur Radiol; 2008 Sep; 18(9):1910-7. PubMed ID: 18414869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A feasibility study of unidirectional 240°-angle 3D CT colonography.
Oh SN; Lee YJ; Kim YS; Jung SE; Rha SE; Shin YR; Byun JY; Choi BG
Clin Imaging; 2012; 36(5):553-8. PubMed ID: 22920361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. [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]
8. 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]
9. Computer-aided detection of colonic polyps at CT colonography using a Hessian matrix-based algorithm: preliminary study.
Kim SH; Lee JM; Lee JG; Kim JH; Lefere PA; Han JK; Choi BI
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Jul; 189(1):41-51. PubMed ID: 17579150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Manual and automated polyp measurement comparison of CT colonography with optical colonoscopy.
Jeong JY; Kim MJ; Kim SS
Acad Radiol; 2008 Feb; 15(2):231-9. PubMed ID: 18206622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Three-dimensional endoluminal CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): comparison of three commercially available systems.
Pickhardt PJ
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Dec; 181(6):1599-606. PubMed ID: 14627581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Polyp measurement reliability, accuracy, and discrepancy: optical colonoscopy versus CT colonography with pig colonic specimens.
Park SH; Choi EK; Lee SS; Byeon JS; Jo JY; Kim YH; Lee KH; Ha HK; Han JK
Radiology; 2007 Jul; 244(1):157-64. PubMed ID: 17507724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [CT colonography: evaluation of two 3D algorithms in a screening population].
Juchems MS; Ernst AS; Sheafor DH; Carrascosa P; Virmany S; Brambs HJ; Aschoff AJ
Rofo; 2009 Jun; 181(6):573-8. PubMed ID: 19440949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Findings on optical colonoscopy after positive CT colonography exam.
Cornett D; Barancin C; Roeder B; Reichelderfer M; Frick T; Gopal D; Kim D; Pickhardt PJ; Taylor A; Pfau P
Am J Gastroenterol; 2008 Aug; 103(8):2068-74. PubMed ID: 18564114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Polyps: linear and volumetric measurement at CT colonography.
Yeshwant SC; Summers RM; Yao J; Brickman DS; Choi JR; Pickhardt PJ
Radiology; 2006 Dec; 241(3):802-11. PubMed ID: 17114627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A novel extra-wide-angle-view colonoscope: a simulated pilot study using anatomic colorectal models.
Uraoka T; Tanaka S; Matsumoto T; Matsuda T; Oka S; Moriyama T; Higashi R; Saito Y
Gastrointest Endosc; 2013 Mar; 77(3):480-3. PubMed ID: 23199903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Causes of false-negative findings at CT colonography.
Halligan S; Park SH; Ha HK
Radiology; 2006 Mar; 238(3):1075-6; author reply 1076-7. PubMed ID: 16505404
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Impact of experience with a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rates and withdrawal times during colonoscopy: the Third Eye Retroscope study group.
DeMarco DC; Odstrcil E; Lara LF; Bass D; Herdman C; Kinney T; Gupta K; Wolf L; Dewar T; Deas TM; Mehta MK; Anwer MB; Pellish R; Hamilton JK; Polter D; Reddy KG; Hanan I
Gastrointest Endosc; 2010 Mar; 71(3):542-50. PubMed ID: 20189513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
