CT colonography: where have we been and where are we going?

Over the past decade, computed tomographic (CT) colonography (also known as virtual colonoscopy) has been used to investigate the colon for colorectal neoplasia. Numerous clinical and technical advances have allowed CT colonography to advance slowly from a research tool to a viable option for colorectal cancer screening. However, substantial controversy remains among radiologists, gastroenterologists, and other clinicians with regard to the current role of CT colonography in clinical practice. On the one hand, all agree there is much excitement about a noninvasive imaging examination that can reliably depict clinically important colorectal lesions. However, this is tempered by results from several recent studies that show the sensitivity of CT colonography may not be as great when performed and the images interpreted by radiologists without expertise and training. The potential to miss important lesions exists; moreover, if polyps cannot be differentiated from folds and residual fecal matter, unnecessary colonoscopy will be performed. In this review, current issues will be discussed regarding colon cancer and the established and reimbursed strategies to screen for it and the past, current, and potential future role of CT colonography.     

CT colonography using 16-MDCT in the evaluation of colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated CT colonography as a method to stage colorectal cancer and detect polyps and cancers in patients with the disease. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Fifty-one consecutive patients thought to have colorectal cancer underwent CT colonography, following a colonoscopy, in both the prone and supine positions. The transverse CT images, multiplanar reconstruction, volume rendered, and virtual colonoscopy images, were independently interpreted by two radiologists. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. The diagnostic accuracy of TNM staging was calculated, and the sensitivity of CT colonography for the detection of cancers and polyps, compared with that of colonoscopy, was calculated using repeated colonoscopic and surgical findings as reference standards. The technical result for distention was also graded. RESULTS: In the 51 patients, surgery and follow-up colonoscopy revealed 21 colorectal cancers (one synchronous cancer) and 41 polyps. The diagnostic accuracies of CT colonography for TNM staging were 95%, 85%, and 100% for tumor, node, and metastasis, respectively. The sensitivity of both CT colonography and initial colonoscopy for cancer detection was 100%. The overall sensitivities of CT colonography and initial colonoscopy for polyp detection were 90% and 78%, respectively (p = 0.001). The sensitivities of CT colonography for detecting polyps of 5 mm or smaller, of 6-9 mm, and of 10 mm or larger were 84%, 94%, and 100%, respectively. The mean overall technical results for the supine and prone positions were ranked as 2.80 (SD, +/- 0.4) and 2.78 (+/- 0.4), respectively, but were without statistical significance (p = 0.781). CONCLUSION: Our preliminary data suggest that for patients with clinical suspicion of colorectal cancer, CT colonoscopy is valuable in staging the tumor and in detecting additional polyps or cancers in areas not evaluated by conventional colonoscopy.     

Clinical results of virtual colonoscopy

With increasing emphasis among the medical community on the early diagnosis and staging of colorectal cancer, interest has grown in CT colonography as a developing technique to challenge existing methods such as the barium enema and conventional colonoscopy. First introduced in 1994, CT colonography has experienced dramatic improvements in both hardware and software capabilities, resulting in shorter scanning times, greater user-friendliness and promising performance statistics. The recent development in multi-slice CT scanners has meant the ability to scan patients in a single breath hold, while innovations in image reconstruction and manipulation have optimised and yet greatly simplified study interpretation. Recent imaging protocols that use IV contrast to stage known or suspected colorectal cancer have been described. Current interest has focused on improving patient acceptance of the technique through the development of faecal tagging agents to avoid full bowel catharsis. This review summarises the development of CT colonography to date, evaluates its applications and performance in the detection and screening of colorectal polyps and looks at future directions of this exciting technique.     

Use of multidetector-row CT colonography for detection of colorectal neoplasia in patients referred via the Department of Health "2-Week-wait" initiative

AIM: Patients referred under the Department of Health 2-week wait initiative with symptoms of colorectal cancer frequently undergo whole-colon examination. We investigated the use of computed tomography (CT) colonography as an alternative to colonoscopy in this scenario. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-four consecutive patients, referred via the 2-week wait initiative and scheduled for colonoscopy, consented to undergo multidetector CT colonography immediately before endoscopy. The site and morphology of any polyp or cancer detected by CT was noted and comparison made with subsequent colonoscopy. RESULTS: Colonoscopy detected polyps or cancer in 29 patients (53.7%). CT colonography prospectively detected 18 of 41 (44%) polyps of 1-5 mm, three of four (75%) polyps of 6-9 mm, four of four (100%) polyps 10 mm or larger, and five of six (83%) cancers. The missed cancer occurred early in the series and was a perceptive error. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CT colonography for cancer and polyps 10 mm or greater on a per patient basis were 90, 100, 100 and 98%, respectively. CT detected one renal cancer and one colonic cancer, initially missed due to incomplete colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: CT colonography is a robust technique for investigation of symptomatic patients. The learning curve must be overcome for optimal performance.     

CT-Kolonographie in der t?glichen Praxis

CLINICAL/METHODICAL ISSUE: Colorectal cancer is a major public health challenge in Austria and Germany. As the participation in dedicated colonoscopy screening programs is rather low, the question of alternative methods is raised again and computed tomography (CT) colonography seems to be a gentle alternative with a very high patient acceptance. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL METHODS: In recent years CT colonography (CTC) has been established besides conventional colonoscopy as a radiological method for the investigation of the entire colon. From axial two-dimensional images three-dimensional images can be generated, allowing a virtual flight through the colon which is why this technique is also known as virtual colonoscopy. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS: The technique of CTC has been improved continuously during recent years. On the one hand the steady decrease in the layer thickness (currently ≤?1?mm) has improved the resolution of volume data sets and on the other hand there has been significant progress in postprocessing. PERFORMANCE: Numerous studies have recently shown that the significance of CTC in the detection of advanced adenomas is similar to conventional colonoscopy. ACHIEVEMENTS: Meanwhile CT colonography is now a routine investigation method established in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (screening). PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Study data now clearly show that CTC, as an alternative to conventional colonoscopy, is a powerful method for investigation of colorectal cancer. To achieve good results adequate preparation including fecal tagging, standardized technical procedures during the investigation and expertise in both 2D and 3D reading are essential.     

Colorectal cancer: role of CT colonography in preoperative evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy

PURPOSE: To evaluate computed tomographic (CT) colonography in patients with clinical suspicion of colorectal cancer and in whom colonoscopy was incomplete. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After incomplete colonoscopy, 34 patients underwent CT colonography before and after intravenous injection of iodinated contrast agent, in supine and prone positions. Twenty patients with no evidence of colon cancer after complete colonoscopy were included as a control group. Sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography were determined for detection of cancers, polyps, and metastases to liver. RESULTS: In 29 patients, surgery revealed 30 colorectal cancers (three synchronous cancers) and two ischemic lesions of the descending colon. Colonoscopy missed 10 colorectal cancers and three synchronous cancers; all were detected with CT colonography. Sensitivity and specificity for detection of colorectal cancer were 56% and 92%, respectively, for incomplete colonoscopy and 100% and 96%, respectively, for CT colonography (P <.01). Sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography in detection of polyps were 86% and 70%, respectively, for diameters of 5 mm or less; 100% and 80%, respectively, for 5-10-mm diameters; and 100% for diameters greater than 10 mm. Spiral CT of the liver revealed four metastases (2-5 cm); sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 43% for nonenhanced scans and 100% for contrast-enhanced scans (P <.01). CONCLUSION: In this selected group of patients, CT colonography provided complete information to properly address surgery of colorectal cancer and treatment of liver metastases.     

Spiral CT pneumocolon: applications, status and limitations

CT pneumocolon is a promising new technique in the diagnosis and management of colon pathology. CT pneumocolon can detect (sensitivity >95%) and stage (accuracy 79%) colorectal cancer and is very accurate in the differentiation of malignant from benign colonic pathologies. It has excellent detection rates for polyps >10 mm in diameter. Several studies using 3D virtual colonoscopy have already proven its high sensitivity and specificity in polyp detection making this technique robust as a screening tool. The combined results for virtual colonoscopy, from all centres, show a sensitivity of >85% in the detection of polyps 10 mm or greater in size, 70-80% for 5-9 mm polyps and an overall specificity of 90%. CT pneumocolon is a safe, non-invasive and cost-effective method for detecting colonic carcinomas and adenomas and correctly identifying which patients need further colonoscopy. The technique is quick, well tolerated and non-operator dependent. It can also image the proximal colon when distal stenoses prevent endoscopic and barium examination. CT pneumocolon is able to identify the features and complications of inflammatory bowel disease. Further research is warranted to fully assess its impact in terms of a screening tool, acceptability, availability and cost benefit.     

Contrast-enhanced CT colonography in recurrent colorectal carcinoma: feasibility of simultaneous evaluation for metastatic disease, local recurrence, and metachronous neoplasia in colorectal carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Contrast-enhanced CT colonography has the potential to detect local recurrence, metachronous disease, and distant metastases in patients with a history of invasive colorectal cancer. The purpose of our study was to determine whether colonic anastomoses prohibit adequate colonic distention on contrast-enhanced CT colonography and to estimate the performance of contrast-enhanced CT colonography in detecting recurrent colorectal carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with a history of resected invasive colorectal carcinoma underwent contrast-enhanced CT colonography and colonoscopy. Colonic distention was graded for different colonic segments. Two radiologists evaluated for the presence of local recurrence, metachronous disease, and metastatic disease. Results were compared with colonoscopy, histology, and clinical follow-up. RESULTS: Most patients had adequate colonic inflation (37/50, 74%). Eleven of 13 patients with inadequate distention had collapse in the sigmoid colon, usually associated with ileocolic anastomoses. Contrast-enhanced CT colonography detected local recurrences with an accuracy of 94% (95% confidence interval, 83-99%). The accuracy of contrast-enhanced CT colonography for metachronous lesions greater than or equal to 1 cm was 92% (95% confidence interval, 80-98%), but there was only one such lesion, which was missed on initial colonoscopy. Stool, granulation tissue, and inflammation can mimic the CT appearance of local recurrence or metachronous disease and account for false-positive examinations. Contrast-enhanced CT colonography identified five patients with metastatic disease. CONCLUSION: Suboptimal sigmoid distention can be seen on contrast-enhanced CT colonography, predominantly in patients with right hemicolectomies. Contrast-enhanced CT colonography is a promising method for detecting local recurrence, metachronous disease, and distant metastases in patients with prior invasive colorectal carcinoma. The technique can also serve as a useful adjunct to colonoscopy by detecting local recurrences or metachronous disease that are endoscopically obscure or by serving as a full structural colonic examination when endoscopy is incomplete.     

Colon cancer screening with virtual colonoscopy: promise, polyps, politics

Virtual colonoscopy (CT colonography) promises to become a primary method for colorectal cancer screening and return radiologists to a major role in colon cancer prevention. Results from major centers in the United States show accuracy to be comparable to conventional colonoscopy for detection of polyps of significant size--that is, greater than 10 mm--with few false-positives. The advent of virtual colonoscopy has also heightened awareness of the natural history of colonic polyps, particularly in terms of identifying an appropriate target size for detection in colorectal screening programs. Small polyps (<10 mm) are often either hyperplastic on histology or are unlikely to progress to frank cancer in the patient's lifetime and are therefore of little clinical significance for the average adult. Thus, the rationale for detecting and removing each and every colonic polyp regardless of size has come under increasing scrutiny in the context of cost-benefit analysis of various test strategies for colorectal cancer screening. Virtual colonoscopy may allow patients to obtain reliable information about the status of their colonic mucosa noninvasively and thus make a more informed decision as to whether to proceed to conventional colonoscopy for polypectomy.     

Diagnostic performance of CT colonography for the detection of colorectal polyps.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic value of CT colonography for the detection of colorectal polyps. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From December 2004 to December 2005, 399 patients underwent CT colonography and follow-up conventional colonoscopy. We excluded cases of advanced colorectal cancer. We retrospectively analyzed the CT colonography findings and follow-up conventional colonoscopy findings of 113 patients who had polyps more than 6 mm in diameter. Radiologists using 3D and 2D computer generated displays interpreted the CT colonography images. The colonoscopists were aware of the CT colonography findings before the procedure. RESULTS: CT colonography detected 132 polyps in 107 of the 113 patients and conventional colonoscopy detected 114 colorectal polyps more than 6 mm in diameter in 87 of the 113 patients. The sensitivity of CT colonography analyzed per polyp was 91% (41/45) for polyps more than 10 mm in diameter and 89% (101/114) for polyps more than 6 mm in diameter. Thirteen polyps were missed by CT colonography and were detected on follow-up conventional colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: CT colonography is a sensitive diagnostic tool for the detection of colorectal polyps and adequate bowel preparation, optimal bowel distention and clinical experience are needed to reduce the rate of missing appropriate lesions.     

Contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography in the follow-up of colorectal cancer patients: a feasibility study

The aim of our study was to assess whether contrast-enhanced CT colonography is a feasible alternative to both conventional colonoscopy and liver ultrasonography in the follow-up program of colorectal cancer patients. Thirty-five patients, surgically treated for colorectal cancer, underwent a follow-up program that included physical examination, carcinoembryonic antigen serum assay, conventional colonoscopy, liver ultrasonography, and chest X-ray. For these patients, we added a yearly contrast-enhanced CT colonography. All CT examinations were performed with a high-resolution protocol using a multidetector spiral CT scanner (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) prior to and after the administration of 130 ml of i.v. contrast material. Images were directly analyzed on a dedicated workstation by two radiologists to determine colonic evaluation, visualization of colonic anastomosis, presence of polyps, and extra-colonic findings. Colonic evaluation was judged as optimal in 91.7% of all colonic segments. All mechanical surgical anastomoses were visualized with CT colonography. There was no evidence of anastomotic recurrence. Seven polyps were detected in five different patients with CT colonography, with two false-positive and no false-negative examinations. Three liver metastases and two basal pulmonary nodules were also identified. Contrast-enhanced CT colonography is a feasible alternative to both conventional colonoscopy and liver ultrasonography in the follow-up of patients operated on for colorectal cancer. Electronic Publication     

Indikationen und Ergebnisse der CT-Kolonographie: von der Vorsorge bis zum symptomatischen Patienten

CT colonography (CTC) is also referred to as virtual colonoscopy and is being used with increasing frequency in radiological practice. While there are still no generally accepted, clear-cut indications for its use in mass colorectal cancer screening, there is evidence that this investigation is useful in patients in whom colonoscopy has not been successful or who have known stenotic lesions in the colon. Recent results of significant comparative studies of CTC and conventional colonoscopy will have some influence on the future place of CTC in screening for cancer of the bowel; they show the great potential of CT-aided bowel examination.     

CT colonography: the next colon screening examination?

Computed tomographic (CT) colonography is a new-generation technique for detecting colorectal neoplasms by using volumetric CT data combined with specialized imaging software. Patient examinations require full colonic preparation, insufflation, and data acquisition with the patient in the supine and prone positions. Current CT technology allows a single image of the colon to be acquired in as little as 20 seconds with a minimum of patient discomfort. Specialized computer software for interpretation usually combines transverse, multiplanar reformation, and three-dimensional endoluminal images for the optimal visualization of the colon and rectum. As of the time this article was written, CT colonography was competitive as a full structural colonic examination for the detection of polyps and cancer. To the authors' knowledge, no study results have yet been reported in a screening population. The unique capabilities of CT colonography include the display of the proximal colon that is inaccessible at colonoscopy because of obstructing colonic lesions or because of incomplete endoscopic examinations and the assessment of extracolonic abdominal and pelvic organs. This abdominopelvic survey potential provides radiologists with an opportunity to discover other potentially life-threatening, asymptomatic conditions. Further technologic developments and validation studies are in progress. CT colonography is an exciting and promising technique with an enormous potential for colorectal screening in the future.     

CT colonography: techniques, indications, findings

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a minimally invasive technique for imaging the entire colon. Based on a helical thin-section CT of the cleansed and air-distended colon, two-dimensional and three-dimensional projections are used for image interpretation. Several clinical improvements in patient preparation, technical advances in CT, and new developments in evaluation software have allowed CTC to develop into a powerful diagnostic tool. It is already well established as a reliable diagnostic tool in symptomatic patients. Many experts currently consider CTC a comparable alternative to conventional colonoscopy, although there is still debate about its sensitivity for the detection of colonic polyps in a screening population. This article summarizes the main indications, the current techniques in patient preparation, data acquisition and data analysis as well as imaging features for common benign and malignant colorectal lesions.     

Colorectal polyps and cancers in asymptomatic average-risk patients: evaluation with CT colonography

PURPOSE: To compare thin-section multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) colonography with conventional colonoscopy in the evaluation of colorectal polyps and cancer in asymptomatic average-risk patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-eight asymptomatic men (age > 50 years) scheduled to undergo screening colonoscopy were enrolled in this study. CT colonography was followed by conventional colonoscopy, performed on the same day. Supine and prone CT colonography were performed after colonic insufflation with room air. A gastroenterologist measured all polyps, which were categorized as 1-5, 6-9, or over 10 mm. Biopsy and histologic evaluation were performed of all polyps. CT colonography and colonoscopy results were compared for location, size, and morphology of detected lesions. Point estimates and 95% CIs were provided for specificity and sensitivity of CT by using results at conventional colonoscopy as the reference standard. RESULTS: At colonoscopy, 98 polyps were identified in 39 patients; 21 (21.4%) of 98 were detected at CT colonography. Sensitivity was 11.5% (nine of 78) for polyps 1-5 mm, 52.9% (nine of 17) for polyps 6-9 mm, and 100% (three of three) for polyps over 10 mm. Results at colonoscopy were normal in 29 (42.6%) of 68 patients; at CT colonography, results were correctly identified as normal in 26 of these 29 patients. In one of these patients, a lesion larger than 10 mm was detected at CT colonography. The per-patient specificity of CT was 89.7% (26 of 29; 95% CI: 72.7%, 97.8%). The mean time for CT image interpretation was 9 minutes. CONCLUSION: In patients at average risk for colorectal cancer, CT colonography is a sensitive and specific screening test for detecting polyps 10 mm or larger; the sensitivity for detecting smaller polyps is decreased. Examination findings can be interpreted in a clinically feasible amount of time.     

CT colonography and colonoscopy: assessment of patient preference in a 5-week follow-up study

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate short- and midterm patient preference of computed tomographic (CT) colonography relative to colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer and to elucidate determinants of preference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer underwent CT colonography prior to scheduled colonoscopy. Patient experience and preference were assessed both directly after the examinations and 5 weeks after the examinations. Differences in pain, embarrassment, discomfort, and preference were assessed with the Wilcoxon signed rank sum test or a binomial test. Potential determinants of preference were investigated with logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Data for 249 patients were included. Fewer patients experienced severe or extreme pain during CT colonography (seven [3%] of 245) than during colonoscopy (81 [34%] of 241) (P < .001). Directly after both examinations, 168 (71%) of 236 patients preferred CT colonography; 5 weeks later, 141 (61%) of 233 patients preferred CT colonography (P < .001). Initially, a painful colonoscopy examination (odds ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08, 0.38) was a determinant of CT colonography preference. Similarly, a painful (odds ratio, 3.70; 95% CI: 1.54, 8.92) or an embarrassing (odds ratio, 4.46; 95% CI: 1.18, 16.88) CT colonography examination was a determinant of colonoscopy preference. After 5 weeks, the presence of polyps emerged as a determinant of colonoscopy preference (odds ratio, 1.94; 95% CI: 1.02, 3.70), while the role of experiences waned. CONCLUSION: Patients preferred CT colonography to colonoscopy; however, this preference decreased in time, while outcome considerations gradually replaced temporary experiences of inconvenience.     

Colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography,colonoscopy, and double-contrast barium enema examination: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences

PURPOSE: To prospectively assess and compare perceptions of and preferences for computed tomographic (CT) colonography, colonoscopy, and double-contrast barium enema examination (DCBE) by asymptomatic patients undergoing colorectal cancer screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 696 asymptomatic patients at higher-than-average risk undergoing colorectal cancer screening were consecutively recruited to undergo both CT colonography and colonoscopy (group 1), and a like group of 617 patients was separately recruited to undergo both CT colonography and DCBE (group 2). Standard bowel preparations were different between the groups undergoing colonoscopy and DCBE. Each patient completed a questionnaire that assessed preparation inconvenience and discomfort, examination discomfort, willingness to repeat examinations, and examination preference. Survey results were compared for significance by using the Wilcoxon rank sum or chi2 test. RESULTS: The majority of patients considered the preparation to be uncomfortable (group 1, 460 of 515 [89%]; group 2, 482 of 538 [90%]) and inconvenient (group 1, 393 of 502 [78%]; group 2, 427 of 527 [81%]). Reported discomfort was similar at CT colonography and colonoscopy (P =.63) but was less at CT colonography than at DCBE (P <.001). Patients experienced significantly less discomfort than expected at both CT colonography and colonoscopy but not at DCBE. Patients' willingness to undergo frequent rescreening was significantly greater for CT colonography than for either colonoscopy or DCBE. The acceptable time interval between screenings was significantly shorter for all examinations if the bowel preparation could be avoided. Overall, patients preferred CT colonography to colonoscopy (group 1, 72.3% vs 5.1%; P <.001) or to DCBE (group 2, 97.0% vs 0.4%; P <.001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing colorectal cancer screening prefer CT colonography to both colonoscopy and DCBE. The majority of patients experience discomfort and inconvenience with cathartic bowel preparation.     

Screening auf kolorektale Neoplasien

CLINICAL ISSUE: Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Screening has been demonstrated to reduce both the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. In addition to the large group with a normal risk level, two further risk groups need to be distinguished: increased family risk and hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. STANDARD METHODS FOR SCREENING: The highest evidence for all screening tests has been demonstrated for guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing. Colonoscopy is a diagnostic and therapeutic tool and it serves as the reference standard for other tests in clinical studies. INNOVATIONS: Fecal immunochemical tests have a higher sensitivity than guaiac-based tests. Several novel techniques are under development and could be adopted by screening programs in the future. Next to colonoscopy, computed tomography (CT) colonography and colon capsule endoscopy have the highest sensitivity for colorectal neoplasia. Molecular tests which are based on the detection of genetic and epigenetic changes of DNA released by the tumor into feces or blood have a high potential and could potentially replace occult blood tests in the future. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Colonoscopy is the primary instrument for screening for colorectal neoplasia. Fecal occult blood testing should only be performed if colonoscopy is denied and CT colonography has not yet been approved for screening in Germany.     

Role of CT virtual colonoscopy versus conventional colonoscopy in the evaluation of colonic polyps

Virtual colonoscopy is one of the recent advances in the field of CT post processing technique. It represents a type of 3D reconstruction technique which is capable of elaborating endoscopic endoluminal display of the colon without the use of real endoscope and hence it was named virtual colonoscopy. The aim of work is to evaluate the role of virtual colonoscopy in colonic polyps.     

Colorectal polyps: detection with low-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography versus two sequential colonoscopies

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of low-radiation-dose computed tomographic (CT) colonography for detection of colorectal polyps by using two sequential colonoscopies, with the second colonoscopy as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was local ethics committee approved, and all patients gave written informed consent. Colonographic images were acquired by using a low-dose multi-detector row CT protocol (effective milliampere-second setting, 10 mAs). Three observers interpreted the CT colonographic data separately and independently by using a two-dimensional technique. Initial conventional colonoscopy was performed by an endoscopist unaware of the CT colonographic findings. Second colonoscopy performed within 2 weeks by a colonoscopist aware of both the CT colonographic and the initial colonoscopic findings served as the reference standard. The sensitivities of CT colonography and initial colonoscopy were calculated on a per-polyp and a per-patient basis. Specificities and positive and negative predictive values also were calculated on a per-patient basis. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients underwent CT colonography and initial conventional colonoscopy on the same day. Per-polyp sensitivities were 62% and 83% for CT colonography and initial colonoscopy, respectively. Sensitivities for detection of polyps 6 mm in diameter or larger were 86% and 84% for CT colonography and initial colonoscopy, respectively. Initial colonoscopy failed to depict 16 polyps, six of which were correctly detected with CT colonography. For identification of patients with polyps 6 mm in diameter or larger, CT colonography and initial colonoscopy, respectively, had sensitivities of 84% and 90%, specificities of 82% and 100%, positive predictive values of 70% and 100%, and negative predictive values of 91% and 95%. CONCLUSION: Low-dose CT colonography compares favorably with colonoscopy for detection of colorectal polyps 6 mm in diameter or larger, with markedly decreased performance for detection of polyps 5 mm in diameter or smaller.