These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
22. Comparative evaluation of the fecal-tagging quality in CT colonography: barium vs. iodinated oral contrast agent. Nagata K; Singh AK; Sangwaiya MJ; Näppi J; Zalis ME; Cai W; Yoshida H Acad Radiol; 2009 Nov; 16(11):1393-9. PubMed ID: 19596591 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate: a review of its use as a colorectal cleanser. Hoy SM; Scott LJ; Wagstaff AJ Drugs; 2009; 69(1):123-36. PubMed ID: 19192941 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. CT colonography after incomplete optical colonoscopy: bowel preparation quality at same-day vs. deferred examination. Theis J; Kim DH; Lubner MG; Muñoz del Rio A; Pickhardt PJ Abdom Radiol (NY); 2016 Jan; 41(1):10-8. PubMed ID: 26830606 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Objective and Subjective Intrapatient Comparison of Iohexol Versus Diatrizoate for Bowel Preparation Quality at CT Colonography. Johnson B; Hinshaw JL; Robbins JB; Pickhardt PJ AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Jun; 206(6):1202-7. PubMed ID: 27010251 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Rockey DC; Paulson E; Niedzwiecki D; Davis W; Bosworth HB; Sanders L; Yee J; Henderson J; Hatten P; Burdick S; Sanyal A; Rubin DT; Sterling M; Akerkar G; Bhutani MS; Binmoeller K; Garvie J; Bini EJ; McQuaid K; Foster WL; Thompson WM; Dachman A; Halvorsen R Lancet; 2005 Jan 22-28; 365(9456):305-11. PubMed ID: 15664225 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Fecal tag CT colonography with a limited 2-day bowel preparation following incomplete colonoscopy. Meric K; Bakal N; Aydin S; Yesil A; Tekesin K; Simsek M Jpn J Radiol; 2015 Jun; 33(6):329-35. PubMed ID: 25895857 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Noncathartic CT colonography: Image quality assessment and performance and in a screening cohort. Fletcher JG; Silva AC; Fidler JL; Cernigliaro JG; Manduca A; Limburg PJ; Wilson LA; Engelby TA; Spencer G; Harmsen WS; Mandrekar J; Johnson CD AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Oct; 201(4):787-94. PubMed ID: 24059367 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Colorectal polyps on portal phase contrast-enhanced CT colonography: lesion attenuation and distinction from tagged feces. Lee SS; Park SH; Choi EK; Kim SY; Kim MJ; Lee KH; Kim YH AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Jul; 189(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 17579149 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Reducing the oral contrast dose in CT colonography: evaluation of faecal tagging quality and patient acceptance. Liedenbaum MH; Denters MJ; Zijta FM; van Ravesteijn VF; Bipat S; Vos FM; Dekker E; Stoker J Clin Radiol; 2011 Jan; 66(1):30-7. PubMed ID: 21147296 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Bowel preparation in CT colonography: Is diet restriction necessary? A randomised trial (DIETSAN). Bellini D; De Santis D; Caruso D; Rengo M; Ferrari R; Biondi T; Laghi A Eur Radiol; 2018 Jan; 28(1):382-389. PubMed ID: 28812132 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. CT colonography with rectal iodine tagging: Feasibility and comparison with oral tagging in a colorectal cancer screening population. Neri E; Mantarro A; Faggioni L; Scalise P; Bemi P; Pancrazi F; D'Ippolito G; Bartolozzi C Eur J Radiol; 2015 Sep; 84(9):1701-7. PubMed ID: 26032131 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Efficacy of barium-based fecal tagging for CT colonography: a comparison between the use of high and low density barium suspensions in a Korean population - a preliminary study. Kim MJ; Park SH; Lee SS; Byeon JS; Choi EK; Kim JH; Kim YN; Kim AY; Ha HK Korean J Radiol; 2009; 10(1):25-33. PubMed ID: 19182500 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Comparison of the relative sensitivity of CT colonography and double-contrast barium enema for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Johnson CD; MacCarty RL; Welch TJ; Wilson LA; Harmsen WS; Ilstrup DM; Ahlquist DA Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol; 2004 Apr; 2(4):314-21. PubMed ID: 15067626 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. CT colonography with limited bowel preparation: performance characteristics in an increased-risk population. Jensch S; de Vries AH; Peringa J; Bipat S; Dekker E; Baak LC; Bartelsman JF; Heutinck A; Montauban van Swijndregt AD; Stoker J Radiology; 2008 Apr; 247(1):122-32. PubMed ID: 18292475 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Meta-analysis comparing CT colonography, air contrast barium enema, and colonoscopy. Rosman AS; Korsten MA Am J Med; 2007 Mar; 120(3):203-210.e4. PubMed ID: 17349438 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Low-volume hybrid bowel preparation combining saline laxatives with oral contrast agents versus standard polyethylene glycol lavage for colonoscopy. Lawrence EM; Pickhardt PJ Dis Colon Rectum; 2010 Aug; 53(8):1176-81. PubMed ID: 20628282 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Critical analysis of the performance of double-contrast barium enema for detecting colorectal polyps > or = 6 mm in the era of CT colonography. Sosna J; Sella T; Sy O; Lavin PT; Eliahou R; Fraifeld S; Libson E AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Feb; 190(2):374-85. PubMed ID: 18212223 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]