208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19089490)
1. Comparison of polyp distance on CT colonography between supine and prone scans using an automated path-distance measurement tool: correlation with colonoscopy.
Park HS; Kim SH; Lee JM; Lee JY; Kim SG; Han JK; Choi BI
Abdom Imaging; 2010 Feb; 35(1):41-8. PubMed ID: 19089490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. CT colonography predictably overestimates colonic length and distance to polyps compared with optical colonoscopy.
Duncan JE; McNally MP; Sweeney WB; Gentry AB; Barlow DS; Jensen DW; Cash BD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Nov; 193(5):1291-5. PubMed ID: 19843744
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Predictive value of morphologic characteristics in rectosigmoid adenomatous polyps for the probability of synchronous polyps or cancer in the proximal colon.
Erdem L; Akbayir N; Yildirim S; Köksal HM; Yenice N; Gültekin OS; Sakiz D; Peker O
Turk J Gastroenterol; 2005 Dec; 16(4):207-11. PubMed ID: 16547849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Normalized distance along the colon centerline: a method for correlating polyp location on CT colonography and optical colonoscopy.
Summers RM; Swift JA; Dwyer AJ; Choi JR; Pickhardt PJ
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Nov; 193(5):1296-304. PubMed ID: 19843745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Feasibility of using the marginal blood vessels as reference landmarks for CT colonography.
Wei Z; Yao J; Wang S; Liu J; Dwyer AJ; Pickhardt PJ; Nowinski WL; Summers RM
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Jan; 202(1):W50-8. PubMed ID: 24370165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Positional change in colon polyps at CT colonography.
Laks S; Macari M; Bini EJ
Radiology; 2004 Jun; 231(3):761-6. PubMed ID: 15163817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Feasibility of automated matching of supine and prone CT-colonography examinations.
de Vries AH; Truyen R; van der Peijl J; Florie J; van Gelder RE; Gerritsen F; Stoker J
Br J Radiol; 2006 Sep; 79(945):740-4. PubMed ID: 16641418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Bowel preparation for CT-colonography: comparison of two different cleansing protocols.
Juchems MS; Hoffmann MH; Schmidt SA; Apostel A; Brambs HJ; Aschoff AJ
Eur J Radiol; 2006 Dec; 60(3):460-4. PubMed ID: 17055683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Comparison of polyp size and volume at CT colonography: implications for follow-up CT colonography.
Bethea E; Nwawka OK; Dachman AH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Dec; 193(6):1561-7. PubMed ID: 19933648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
