144 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22920361)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Primary three-dimensional analysis with perspective-filet view versus primary two-dimensional analysis: evaluation of lesion detection by inexperienced readers at computed tomographic colonography in symptomatic patients.
Fisichella VA; Jäderling F; Horvath S; Stotzer PO; Kilander A; Hellström M
Acta Radiol; 2009 Apr; 50(3):244-55. PubMed ID: 19235581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Primary 2D versus primary 3D polyp detection at screening CT colonography.
Pickhardt PJ; Lee AD; Taylor AJ; Michel SJ; Winter TC; Shadid A; Meiners RJ; Chase PJ; Hinshaw JL; Williams JG; Prout TM; Husain SH; Kim DH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Dec; 189(6):1451-6. PubMed ID: 18029884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Comparison of a unidirectional panoramic 3D endoluminal interpretation technique to traditional 2D and bidirectional 3D interpretation techniques at CT colonography: preliminary observations.
Lenhart DK; Babb J; Bonavita J; Kim D; Bini EJ; Megibow AJ; Macari M
Clin Radiol; 2010 Feb; 65(2):118-25. PubMed ID: 20103433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Colonic polyps: application value of computer-aided detection in computed tomographic colonography.
Zhang HM; Guo W; Liu GF; An DH; Gao SH; Sun LB; Yang HS
Chin Med J (Engl); 2011 Feb; 124(3):380-4. PubMed ID: 21362337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 3D detection of colonic polyps by CT colonography: accuracy, pitfalls, and solutions by adjunct 2D workup.
Schmidt SA; Ernst AS; Beer M; Juchems MS
Clin Radiol; 2015 Oct; 70(10):1144-51. PubMed ID: 26220124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Diagnostic accuracy of laxative-free computed tomographic colonography for detection of adenomatous polyps in asymptomatic adults: a prospective evaluation.
Zalis ME; Blake MA; Cai W; Hahn PF; Halpern EF; Kazam IG; Keroack M; Magee C; Näppi JJ; Perez-Johnston R; Saltzman JR; Vij A; Yee J; Yoshida H
Ann Intern Med; 2012 May; 156(10):692-702. PubMed ID: 22586008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Detection of flat colorectal polyps at screening CT colonography in comparison with conventional polypoid lesions.
Sakamoto T; Mitsuzaki K; Utsunomiya D; Matsuda K; Yamamura S; Urata J; Kawakami M; Yamashita Y
Acta Radiol; 2012 Sep; 53(7):714-9. PubMed ID: 22821957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Fundamental elements for successful performance of CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy).
Park SH; Yee J; Kim SH; Kim YH
Korean J Radiol; 2007; 8(4):264-75. PubMed ID: 17673837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Performance of a previously validated CT colonography computer-aided detection system in a new patient population.
Summers RM; Handwerker LR; Pickhardt PJ; Van Uitert RL; Deshpande KK; Yeshwant S; Yao J; Franaszek M
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Jul; 191(1):168-74. PubMed ID: 18562741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Nonlaxative PET/CT colonography: feasibility, acceptability, and pilot performance in patients at higher risk of colonic neoplasia.
Taylor SA; Bomanji JB; Manpanzure L; Robinson C; Groves AM; Dickson J; Papathanasiou ND; Greenhalgh R; Ell PJ; Halligan S
J Nucl Med; 2010 Jun; 51(6):854-61. PubMed ID: 20484420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A comparison of optical colonoscopy and CT colonography screening strategies in the detection and recovery of subcentimeter adenomas.
Benson M; Dureja P; Gopal D; Reichelderfer M; Pfau PR
Am J Gastroenterol; 2010 Dec; 105(12):2578-85. PubMed ID: 20842111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
