Comparison of volume-rendered and surface-rendered MR colonography

In the United States and Europe, colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths. It is well known that colorectal carcinomas may originate from preexisting adenomas. For the visualization of colorectal cancer and other pathologic changes such as polyps, two 3D methods (volume-rendering (VR) and surface-rendering (SR)) in MR colonography were compared in our study. MR colonography was carried out in 17 patients on a 1.5 T MR scanner using a 10 mmolar gadolinium water solution enema. Coronal as well as rotated VR and SR views were compared in order to examine the technical quality (TQ) of the visualization model and grade of confidence (GC) in the pathological findings. Colonoscopic findings revealed 8 colorectal carcinoma, 10 patients with polyps, 4 diverticular disease, and 2 with redundant bowel loops. Based on a total of 248 colonic segments for both visualization methods, volume rendering were significantly superior to surface rendering for both, TQ (p<0.0001) and GC (p<0.0001). Volume rendering and surface rendering were not dependent on individual colon segments (p=0.13 for TQ and p=0.18 for GC) or on image rotation (p=0.06 for TQ and p=0.062 for GC). It is also independent of the type of pathology (p=0.31 for TQ and p=0.42 for GC) and the reviewers (p=0.62 for TQ and p=0.88 for GC). This indicates, that for the purpose of interpreting the technical quality and pathological findings, volume rendering is superior to surface rendering in MR colonography. Volume rendering could be used as an 3D visualization tool, enabling MR colonography examinations to be completed sooner in cases where colon distension is sufficient, and it would also provide an overview of potential mass lesions.