Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Dec;9(4):555-61.
doi: 10.1007/s10689-010-9350-9.

Magnetic resonance colonography for colorectal cancer screening in patients with Lynch syndrome gene mutation

Affiliations

Magnetic resonance colonography for colorectal cancer screening in patients with Lynch syndrome gene mutation

Eu Jin Lim et al. Fam Cancer. 2010 Dec.

Abstract

Lynch syndrome gene carriers have a 50-80% risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Current guidelines recommend yearly colonoscopy, with associated procedure-related risks. Magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) was evaluated as a non-invasive alternative for CRC screening in this high-risk population. Adult Lynch syndrome gene carriers underwent both screening procedures on the same day. MRI radiologists read the scans and rated image quality. Endoscopists performed colonoscopy unaware of MRC findings until after procedure completion. If lesions were detected, their number, size and location were noted. Post-procedure, patients compared discomfort and inconvenience of MRC and colonoscopy on a visual analogue scale. Thirty patients were recruited. 83% of the MRC scans were of adequate to good quality. MRC detected three lesions in three patients (70, 36, 17 mm). All 3 were independently detected on colonoscopy, excised and found to be CRC. MRC failed to detect a 3 mm CRC found on colonoscopy. CRC prevalence was 13%. Colonoscopy detected a further 30 polyps, all <10 mm. Of these, 17 were hyperplastic polyps and 10 normal mucosa. Colonoscopy had a false positive rate of 32% as defined by histology. MRC failed to detect any polyp <10 mm. Mean patient discomfort scores were 20% for MRC and 68% for colonoscopy, P = 0.003. Mean patient inconvenience scores were 54% for MRC and 52% for colonoscopy, P = 0.931. MRC was reliable in detecting large polyps, potentially CRC. However MRC currently has poor sensitivity in detecting small polyps, limiting its utility in adenoma screening at this time. MRC was associated with less discomfort than CC.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. N Engl J Med. 2003 Mar 6;348(10):919-32 - PubMed
    1. JAMA. 2004 Apr 14;291(14):1713-9 - PubMed
    1. Cancer Treat Rev. 2003 Dec;29(6):461-70 - PubMed
    1. Ann Intern Med. 2003 Apr 1;138(7):560-70 - PubMed
    1. Acad Radiol. 2009 Jul;16(7):790-7 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources