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 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.     

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.     

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.     

Feasibility of ultra-low-dose multislice CT colonography for the detection of colorectal lesions: preliminary experience

Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of ultra-low-dose scanning for multislice CT colonography in the detection of colorectal lesions. Twenty-seven patients (14 men, 13 women) with clinical indication for conventional colonoscopy were recruited. Multislice spiral CT (Somatom Plus 4 Volume Zoom, Siemens, Germany) examinations were performed after standard oral colonoscopic preparation and colonic distension with room air. Images were acquired using 2.5-mm collimation, 3.0-mm slice thickness, standard reconstruction kernel, 140 kVp, and 10 mAs. Supine and prone acquisitions were obtained in all patients. Images were analyzed on a workstation by two gastrointestinal radiologists. Conventional colonoscopy was performed on the same day in all patients and represented the standard of reference. Total radiation exposure was also calculated. All colorectal cancers were correctly identified at CT colonography (9 of 9, sensitivity 100%). The CT colonography also detected 10 of 12 polyps (overall sensitivity 83.3%). Based on polyp diameter, the sensitivity for the detection of polyps 10 mm or larger was 100% (3 of 3); between 6 and 9 mm, 100% (3 of 3); and 5 mm or smaller, 66.6% (4 of 6). Total radiation exposure for prone and supine acquisitions combined was 1.7 mSv (for men) and 2.3 mSv (for women). Although preliminary, our experience suggests that ultra-low-dose scanning for multislice CT colonography is feasible. This technique provides a sensitivity comparable to that of previous experiences with CT colonography but with a 40–70% reduction of the radiation dose delivered to patients. Electronic Publication     

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.     

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.     

Significance of missed polyps at CT colonography

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to determine the clinical significance of polyps missed on CT colonography using histologic analysis and the natural history of colorectal polyps and to propose guidelines for follow-up colon surveillance based on CT colonographic findings. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. One hundred eighty-six men (age range, 40-87 years; mean, 62.3 years) underwent CT colonography immediately before conventional colonoscopy. All polyps detected on CT colonography were measured and imaged, and their segmental location was documented. All polyps detected on colonoscopy were measured, photographed, biopsied, and histologically analyzed. Results of CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy were compared with the final pathology reports. Conventional colonoscopy was used as the gold standard unless CT colonography showed a lesion measuring 10 mm or more that was not detected on conventional colonoscopy and had characteristics of a polyp. In these cases, follow-up conventional colonoscopy was offered. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-one polyps were detected on conventional colonoscopy. CT colonography prospectively detected 53 polyps. Histologic analysis of the polyps not detected on CT colonography showed that of those 5 mm or smaller, 58.1% were not adenomas, and of those measuring 6-9 mm, 42.8% were not adenomas. Both missed polyps at CT colonography of 10 mm or more were adenomas. Of the 22 polyps measuring 10 mm or more, three were not detected on conventional colonoscopy. Of these three, CT colonography showed a lesion having characteristics of a polyp, follow-up endoscopy confirmed the presence of the lesion, and histologic analysis showed a villous adenoma, a tubulovillous adenoma, and a tubular adenoma. CONCLUSION: If CT colonography shows no abnormality, follow-up screening in 5 years is recommended. If CT colonography detects a lesion smaller than 5 mm, follow-up imaging in 3-5 years is recommended. If CT colonography detects a lesion measuring 6 mm or more, endoscopy and polypectomy should be offered unless contraindicated.     

MR colonography in patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopy

PURPOSE: To assess dark-lumen magnetic resonance (MR) colonography for the evaluation of colonic segments in patients in whom conventional colonoscopy could not be completed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and written informed consent were obtained. Within 24 hours of incomplete conventional colonoscopy, 37 patients (22 women, 15 men; age range, 25-63 years) underwent MR colonography. Contrast material-enhanced T1-weighted three-dimensional images were collected after rectal administration of water for colonic distention. Data from MR colonography were evaluated by two radiologists. With a three-point scale, image quality was characterized in terms of colonic distention (1 = good; 2 = moderate, diagnostic; and 3 = poor, nondiagnostic) and presence of artifacts (1 = none; 2 = moderate, diagnostic; and 3 = extensive, nondiagnostic). Depiction of colorectal disease was assessed according to the following colonic segments: cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, descending colon, sigmoid colon, and rectum. RESULTS: Four patients had history of colorectal cancer, and each had undergone partial colonic resection of two segments. Hence, 214 segments were evaluated. Conventional colonoscopy failed in assessment of 127 of 214 potentially visible colonic segments in the 37 patients. MR image quality was rated diagnostic in 35 patients and permitted assessment of 206 of 214 potentially visible segments. Nondiagnostic image quality in two patients was attributed to inadequate distention of prestenotic colonic segments owing to high-grade tumor stenosis. All inflammation- and tumor-induced stenoses and all five polyps identified at conventional colonoscopy in poststenotic segments were correctly detected at MR colonography. However, MR-based assessment of prestenotic segments revealed two lesions suspected of being carcinoma, five polyps, and four segments affected by colitis. CONCLUSION: MR colonography proved reliable in evaluating the majority of colonic segments inaccessible with conventional colonoscopy. The identification of additional disease at MR colonography underscores the need for a second diagnostic step in the setting of incomplete conventional colonoscopy.     

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.     

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.     

Patient acceptance for CT colonography: what is the real issue?

The aim of this study was to evaluate the discomfort associated with CT colonography compared with colonoscopy and bowel purgation cleansing, and to evaluate patient preference between CT colonography and colonoscopy. In a total of 124 patients, scheduled for multidetector virtual CT colonography and diagnostic colonoscopy, patient acceptance and future preference were assessed during the different steps of the procedure (colon preparation, CT examination, and conventional colonoscopy). Patients who described contradictory findings between the degree of discomfort and their preference regarding follow-up examinations were retrospectively reinterviewed regarding the reason for this discrepancy. Colonoscopy was graded slightly more uncomfortable than virtual CT colonography, but the preparation was clearly the most uncomfortable part of the procedure. Concerning their preference regarding follow-up examinations, 71% of the patients preferred virtual CT colonography, 24% preferred colonoscopy, and 5% had no preference. Twenty-eight percent of the patients preferred virtual CT colonography despite that they thought it was equally or even more uncomfortable than colonoscopy. This was mainly due to the faster procedure (17 patients), the lower physical challenge (14 patients), and the lack of sedation (12 patients) of virtual CT colonography. Factors other than the discomfort related to the examinations play an important role in the patient's preference for virtual CT colonography, namely the faster procedure, the lower physical challenge, and the lack of sedation. Since the preparation plays a major decisive factor in the patient acceptance of virtual CT colonography, more attention should be given to fecal tagging.     

Colonic surveillance by CT colonography using axial images only

Patients at increased risk of colon cancer require strict colon surveillance. Our objective was to establish the efficacy of 2D axial CT colonography as a surveillance test when performed in routine clinical practice. Eighty-two patients at increased risk of colon cancer underwent CT colonography followed by conventional colonoscopy on the same morning. CT colonography studies were performed on a four-ring multidetector CT scanner (100 mAs, 120 kVp, 4×2.5 collimation) and were interpreted by two radiologists using 2D axial images only. Results were correlated with findings at colonoscopy. Note was made of subsequent histology reports from polypectomy specimens. A total of 52 polyps were detected at colonoscopy. Using 2D axial images alone, with no recourse to 2D multiplanar or 3D views, the sensitivity of CT colonography was 100, 33 and 19% for polyps larger than 9, 6–9 and smaller than 6 mm, respectively. Per-patient specificities were 98.8, 96 and 81.5%, respectively. Twenty-nine percent of polyps smaller than 1 cm were adenomatous and there were no histological features of severe dysplasia. CT colonography is a useful colon surveillance tool for patients at increased risk of colon cancer. It has a high specificity for identifying patients who should proceed to colonoscopy and polypectomy, while allowing further colon examination to be deferred in patients with normal studies. Using 2D axial images only, CT colonography can be performed as part of the daily CT workload, with a very low rate of referral for unnecessary colonoscopy.     

Contrast-enhanced CT colonography with 64-slice MDCT compared to endoscopic colonoscopy in the follow-up of patients after colorectal cancer resection

BackgroundSeventy percent of newly diagnosed colorectal cancer cases are potential candidates for curative surgery, but after resection, in 30%, the tumor will recur.Postoperative follow-up includes endoscopic colonoscopy (EC) and computed tomography (CT). There have been only a few publications on the use of contrast-enhanced CT colonography (CECTC) in the follow-up of these patients.MethodsTwenty-nine consecutive patients after resection of colorectal cancer underwent CECTC and EC on the same day. CECTC studies were reviewed for identification of strictures, recurrence, polyps and metastases.ResultsThe anastomosis was identified in 96% of patients on CECTC and in 82% on endoscopic colonoscopy. One stricture was identified by both techniques. One extraluminal recurrence was depicted only on CECTC. Sensitivity in detecting polyps was per polyp 93% and per patient 100%.ConclusionCECTC performed on a 64-slice multidetector CT is reliable in imaging the postoperative colon for the follow-up of patients after resection of colorectal cancer.     

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.     

Multislice spiral CT colonography in the evaluation of colorectal neoplasms

PURPOSE: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of multislice spiral CT colonography: 1) in the diagnosis and staging of colorectal carcinoma; 2) in the evaluation of the proximal colon in patients with stenosing neoplasms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: There were 33 patients (21 males and 12 females) with known colorectal carcinoma diagnosed by conventional colonoscopy. All patients enrolled in the study underwent both conventional colonoscopy followed by CT colonography on the same day. CT examination was performed using a multislice spiral CT scanner (Somatom Plus 4 Volume Zoom; Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). Imaging parameters were: slice collimation, 1 mm; slice thickness, 1 mm; table speed, 8 mm/sec; reconstruction interval, 1 mm; mAs, 80; kVp, 120; acquisition time, 25-32 sec. Image analysis was performed using a software package with volume-rendering capabilities (Vitrea 2.6; Vital Images, Minneapolis, USA). Image analysis consisted in the evaluation of: 1) number, size, and location of the lesions; 2) primary tumor staging. For the purposes of tumor staging, we utilized the TNM staging system. For the evaluation of parameters T and N, histologic examination on resected surgical specimens and lymph nodes served as the standard of reference. The presence of hepatic metastases was confirmed by means of partial surgical resection in patients with single metastasis or by means of intraoperative ultrasonography in patients with multiple metastases. RESULTS: Conventional colonoscopy detected 33 carcinomas and 4 polyps and was incomplete in 9 cases (27.2% of all examinations) due to stenosing lesions. CT colonography provided adequate visualization of the whole colon in all patients with identification of 35 carcinomas (33 primary and 2 synchronous) and 10 polyps. Therefore, CT colonography correctly detected all lesions seen at conventional colonoscopy and yielded the additional identification of 2 synchronous tumors and 6 polyps located in the colon proximal to the primary stenosing neoplasm. Primary tumor staging with CT colonography was correct in 32 of 33 patients (accuracy, 96.9%) CONCLUSIONS: Multislice spiral CT colonography detected all primary neoplasms, provided correct staging of 96.9% of tumors and visualized the whole colon even in patients with stenosing lesions. Considering the current limitations of the other procedures and the possibility of assessing both the colon and the extracolonic structures, multislice spiral CT colonography can be proposed as the initial diagnostic modality for pre-operative evaluation of patients with colorectal carcinoma.     

电子束CT检查结肠病变的初步探讨

目的　初步评价ＣＴ检查结肠病变的价值。材料和方法 ３８例病例,男性２５例,女性 １３例。年龄 １８～７１岁,多平面二维图像和三维图像都来源于结肠充气后电子束ＣＴ连续薄层扫描横断面图像。通过将ＣＴ数据输入工作站进行三维模拟内镜检查,三维图像采用表面遮盖显示法重建。结果　本组中发现９例肿瘤和１０个息肉,２个息肉团结肠扩张不充分漏诊,本组中有２例假阳性病例。结论　ＣＴ检查结肠在诊断结肠病变方面有较大潜力,可能成为一种较其它检查更为理想的筛选方法。     

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.     

Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients

PURPOSE: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of computed tomographic (CT) colonography for colorectal polyp and cancer detection by using colonoscopy as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three hundred patients underwent CT colonography followed by standard colonoscopy. Bowel preparation consisted of magnesium citrate and polyethylene glycol. After colonic air insufflation, patients underwent scanning in the supine and prone positions with 3-mm collimation during a single breath hold. The transverse CT images, sagittal and coronal reformations, and three-dimensional endoluminal images were interpreted by two radiologists independently, and then a consensus reading was performed. CT colonographic findings were correlated with standard colonoscopic and histologic findings. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography for polyp detection were 90.1% (164 of 182) and 72.0% (85 of 118), respectively. By using direct polyp matching, the overall sensitivity was 69.7% (365 of 524). The sensitivity was 90% (74 of 82) for the detection of polyps 10 mm or larger, 80.1% (113 of 141) for polyps 5.0-9.9 mm, and 59.1% (178 of 301) for polyps smaller than 5 mm. The sensitivity was 94% (64 of 68) for the detection of adenomas 10 mm or larger, 82% (72 of 88) for adenomas 5.0-9.9 mm, and 66.9% (95 of 142) for adenomas smaller than 5 mm. CT colonography was used to identify all eight carcinomas. CONCLUSION: CT colonography has excellent sensitivity for the detection of clinically important colorectal polyps and cancer.     

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.