Download PDF
Endoscopy 2000; 32(5): 406-410
DOI: 10.1055/s-2000-639
Review

Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Gastroenterology: Time to Say Good-bye to All That Endoscopy?

H. E. Adamek 1 , H. Breer 2 , T. Karschkes 2 , J. Albert 1 , J. F. Riemann 1
  • 1 Dept. of Medicine, Klinikum Ludwigshafen, Academic Hospital of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Ludwigshafen, Germany
  • 2 Dept. of Radiology, Klinikum Ludwigshafen, Academic Hospital of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Ludwigshafen, Germany
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
31 December 2000 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been described as the most important development in medical diagnosis since the discovery of the roentgen ray more than 100 years ago. The effectiveness of MRI has been extended to make it applicable in a wide variety of gastrointestinal disorders. The attention of gastroenterologists is currently focusing on pancreaticobiliary and bowel diseases. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) has become a competitive alternative to diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in a variety of hepatobiliary and pancreatic diseases. Magnetic resonance enteroscopy has the potential to become the preferable method for evaluating the entire small bowel; virtual colonoscopy, on the other hand, is far from the stage at which it could be promoted as a tool for general screening purposes in suspected colonic diseases. Its drawbacks include problems with standardization, implementation of the techniques in generalized settings, and patient acceptance.

References

  • 1 Wallner B K, Schumacher K A, Weidenmaier W, et al. Dilated biliary tract: evaluation with MR cholangiography with a T2-weighted contrast enhanced fast sequence.  Radiology. 1991;  181 805-808
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Soto J A, Barish M A, Yucel E K, et al. Magnetic resonance cholangiography: comparison with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.  Gastroenterology. 1996;  110 589-597
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Zidi S H, Prat F, Le Guen O, et al. Use of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis: prospective comparison with a reference imaging method.  Gut. 1999;  44 118-122
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Adamek H E, Albert J, Weitz M, et al. A prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in patients with suspected bile duct obstruction.  Gut. 1988;  43 680-683
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kubo S, Hamba H, Hirohashi K, et al. Magnetic resonance cholangiography in hepatolithiasis.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1997;  92 629-631
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Hintze R E, Adler A, Veltzke W, et al. Clinical significance of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) compared with ERCP.  Endoscopy. 1997;  29 182-187
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Matos C, Metens T, Devière J, et al. Pancreatic duct: morphologic and functional evaluation with dynamic MR pancreatography after secretin stimulation.  Radiology. 1997;  203 435-441
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Lecesne R, Taourel P, Bret P M, et al. Acute pancreatitis: interobserver agreement and correlation of CT and MR cholangiopancreatography with outcome.  Radiology. 1999;  211 727-735
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Sica G T, Braver J, Cooney M J, et al. Comparison of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with MR cholangiopancreatography in patients with pancreatitis.  Radiology. 1999;  210 605-610
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Sugiyama M, Atomi Y, Hachiya J. Intraductal papillary tumors of the pancreas: evaluation with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;  93 156-159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Barish M A, Yucel E C, Ferrucci J T. Current concepts: magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography.  N Engl J Med. 1999;  341 258-264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Adamek H E, Weitz M, Breer H, et al. Value of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) after unsuccessful ERCP.  Endoscopy. 1997;  29 741-744
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lomas D J, Graves M J. Small bowel MRI using water as a contrast medium.  Br J Radiol. 1999;  72 994-997
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Luboldt W, Bauerfeind P, Steiner P, et al. Preliminary assessment of three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging for various colonic disorders.  Lancet. 1997;  349 1288-1291
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hara A K, Johnson C D, Reed J E, et al. Detection of colorectal polyps by computed tomographic colography: feasibility of a novel technique.  Gastroenterology. 1996;  110 284-290
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Fenlon H M, Nunes D P, Schroy P C, et al. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps.  N Engl J Med. 1999;  341 1496-1503
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Rex D K, Vining D, Kopecky K K. An initial experience with screening for colon polyps using spiral CT with and without CT colography.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;  50 309-313
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 McFarland E G, Brink J A. Helical CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): the challenge that exists between advancing technology and generalizability.  Am J Roentgenol. 1999;  173 549-559
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hara A K, Johnson C D, Reed J E, et al. Reducing data size and radiation dose for CT colonography.  Am J Roentgenol. 1997;  169 1181-1184
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Akerkar G A, Hung R K, Yee J, et al. Virtual colonoscopy: real pain.  Gastroenterology. 1999;  116 A44 (abstract)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Debatin J F, Luboldt W, Bauerfeind P. Virtual colonoscopy in 1999: computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging?.  Endoscopy. 1999;  31 174-179
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Luboldt W, Frohlich J M, Schneider N, et al. MR colonography: optimized enema composition.  Radiology. 1999;  212 265-269
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Brown G, Richards C J, Newcombe R G, et al. Rectal carcinoma: thin-section MR imaging for staging in 28 patients.  Radiology. 1999;  211 215-222
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Fenlon H M, McAneny D B, Nunes D P, et al. Occlusive colon carcinoma: virtual colonoscopy in the preoperative evaluation of the proximal colon.  Radiology. 1999;  210 423-428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

H. E. Adamek, M.D.

Med. Klinik C Klinikum Ludwigshafen

Bremserstrasse 79 67063 Ludwigshafen Germany

Fax: Fax:+ 49-621-5034112

Email: E-mail:medclu@t-online.de