AJR Women's Imaging Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Glick, S.
Right arrow Articles by Brandon, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Glick, S.
Right arrow Articles by Brandon, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 152, Issue 3, 513-517
Copyright © 1989 by American Roentgen Ray Society

Articles

Large colonic neoplasms missed by endoscopy

SN Glick, SK Teplick, DM Balfe, MS Levine, AE Gasparaitis, DD Maglinte, MJ Shortsleeve, and JC Brandon

Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hahnemann University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA 19102.

Endoscopy is commonly accepted as the gold standard in the evaluation of neoplastic colonic disease. The procedure is used to confirm or exclude lesions detected on barium enemas, with the assumption that the endoscopist was successful in reaching the appropriate segment of the colon. We collected 18 cases, all with proved colonic neoplasm 2-8 cm in diameter that were detected by barium enema but overlooked on initial endoscopy. All of the lesions were relatively flat with little intraluminal protuberance. Histologic examination showed malignant foci in six of 11 tumors that were resected. In two of the other seven patients, unresected lesions progressed to advanced carcinomas. This experience suggests that a repeat barium enema is indicated when endoscopy fails to detect a colonic tumor suspected on barium enema examination.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JCOHome page
H. Singh, S. Sethi, M. Raber, and L. A. Petersen
Errors in Cancer Diagnosis: Current Understanding and Future Directions
J. Clin. Oncol., November 1, 2007; 25(31): 5009 - 5018.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
G. M. Galdino and J. Yee
Carpet Lesion on CT Colonography: A Potential Pitfall
Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2003; 180(5): 1332 - 1334.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
P. M. McMahon, J. L. Bosch, S. Gleason, E. F. Halpern, J. S. Lester, and G. S. Gazelle
Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening
Radiology, April 1, 2001; 219(1): 44 - 50.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
M. S. Levine, S. E. Rubesin, I. Laufer, and H. Herlinger
Diagnosis of Colorectal Neoplasms at Double-Contrast Barium Enema Examination
Radiology, July 1, 2000; 216(1): 11 - 18.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. Glick
Double-Contrast Barium Enema for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Review of the Issues and a Comparison with Other Screening Alternatives
Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2000; 174(6): 1529 - 1537.
[Full Text]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
G. S. Gazelle, P. M. McMahon, and F. J. Scholz
Screening for Colorectal Cancer
Radiology, May 1, 2000; 215(2): 327 - 335.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1989 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.