Radiology - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11343/196

Filters

2010 - 2014 2
2
Reset filters

Settings
Statistics
Citations
Start date: 2010 × End date: 2019 × Author: Macrae, Finlay ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Capsule endoscopy versus magnetic resonance enterography for the detection of small bowel polyps in Peutz-Jeghers syndrome
    Urquhart, P ; Grimpen, F ; Lim, GJ ; Pizzey, C ; Stella, DL ; Tesar, PA ; Macrae, FA ; Appleyard, MA ; Brown, GJ (SPRINGER, 2014-06)
    Our study aimed to assess the diagnostic utility of magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) compared to capsule endoscopy (CE) for the detection of small bowel polyps in patients with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome (PJS); with findings verified by balloon enteroscopy (BE). Adult patients were prospectively recruited across two tertiary centres and underwent MRE followed by CE, with a subsequent BE performed in patients with significant (≥10 mm) polyps. The primary endpoint was the total number of significant (≥10 mm) small bowel polyps detected. The number of patients with at least one significant polyp, correlation with BE findings, and patients' preferences were secondary endpoints. A total of 20 patients (7 male; mean age 34.9 years) underwent both investigations. The number of polyps ≥10 mm detected by CE was greater than by MRE (47 vs 14 polyps, P = 0.02). The number of patients with at least one significant polyp identified by CE was 11 (55 %) compared with 7 (35 %) identified by MRE (P = 0.25). Subsequent BE in 12 patients identified a total of 26 significant polyps in 8 patients. The positive predictive value of finding a polyp at BE was higher for MRE (100 %) compared to CE (60 %). Overall patient preferences identified CE as the preferred modality. This prospective study demonstrated that CE identifies significantly more small bowel polyps compared with MRE in patients with PJS. Correlation between the two techniques and subsequent BE however was relatively poor.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Surveillance of FAP: a prospective blinded comparison of capsule endoscopy and other GI imaging to detect small bowel polyps
    Tescher, P ; Macrae, FA ; Speer, T ; Stella, D ; Gibson, R ; Tye-Din, JA ; Srivatsa, G ; Jones, IT ; Marion, K (BMC, 2010-04-04)
    BACKGROUND: Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a hereditary disorder characterized by polyposis along the gastrointestinal tract. Information on adenoma status below the duodenum has previously been restricted due to its inaccessibility in vivo. Capsule Endoscopy (CE) may provide a useful adjunct in screening for polyposis in the small bowel in FAP patients. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of CE in the assessment of patients with FAP, compared to other imaging modalities for the detection of small bowel polyps. METHOD: 20 consecutive patients with previously diagnosed FAP and duodenal polyps, presenting for routine surveillance of polyps at The Royal Melbourne Hospital were recruited. Each fasted patient initially underwent a magnetic resonance image (MRI) of the abdomen, and a barium small bowel follow-through study. Capsule Endoscopy was performed four weeks later on the fasted patient. An upper gastrointestinal side-viewing endoscopy was done one (1) to two (2) weeks after this. Endoscopists and investigators were blinded to results of other investigations and patient history. RESULTS: Within the stomach, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy found more polyps than other forms of imaging. SBFT and MRI generally performed poorly, identifying fewer polyps than both upper gastrointestinal and capsule endoscopy. CE was the only form of imaging that identified polyps in all segments of the small bowel as well as the only form of imaging able to provide multiple findings outside the stomach/duodenum. CONCLUSION: CE provides important information on possible polyp development distal to the duodenum, which may lead to surgical intervention. The place of CE as an adjunct in surveillance of FAP for a specific subset needs consideration and confirmation in replication studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12608000616370.