CT colonography interpretation times: effect of reader experience, fatigue, and scan findings in a multi-centre setting

Our purpose was to assess the effect of reader experience, fatigue, and scan findings on interpretation time for CT colonography. Nine radiologists (experienced in CT colonography); nine radiologists and ten technicians (both groups trained using 50 validated examinations) read 40 cases (50% abnormal) under controlled conditions. Individual interpretation times for each case were recorded, and differences between groups determined. Multi-level linear regression was used to investigate effect of scan category (normal or abnormal) and observer fatigue on interpretation times. Experienced radiologists (mean time 10.9 min, SD 5.2) reported significantly faster than less experienced radiologists and technicians; odds ratios of reporting times 1.4 (CI 1.1, 1.8) and 1.6 (1.3, 2.0), respectively (P≤0.001). Experienced and less-experienced radiologists took longer to report abnormal cases; ratio 1.2 (CI 1.1,1.4, P<0.001) and 1.2 (1.0, 1.3, P=0.03), respectively. All groups took 70% as long to report the final five cases as they did with an initial five; ratio 0.7 (CI 0.6 to 0.8), P<0.001. For technicians only, accuracy increased with longer reporting times (P=0.04). Experienced radiologists report faster than do less-experienced observers and proportionally spend less time interpreting normal cases. Technicians who report more slowly are more accurate. All groups reported faster as the study period progressed.     

Manual and automated polyp measurement comparison of CT colonography with optical colonoscopy

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess (1) the agreement of two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) manual and automated polyp linear diameter measurements at CT colonography (CTC), with optical colonoscopic equivalents and (2) intraobserver and interobserver agreement of the CTC measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the same CTC system, two radiologists independently measured the maximum linear diameter of 44 polyps (reference size 3-15 mm) matched on CTC and optical colonoscopy: manual 2D optimized multiplanar reformatted planes with standard window settings (level 1500 HU, width -200 HU), manual 3D measurement with software calipers and automated 3D measurement with software. After 2 weeks, polyps were measured again. Compatibility of CTC measurement with that of optical colonoscopy and measurement reproducibility was assessed statistically. RESULTS: In the manual measurement, 44 polyps were analyzed and 41 in automated measurement; three polyps could not be extracted. Although the measurement difference was noted for automated, manual 3D, and manual 2D measurements, statistically supported agreement with optical colonoscopic measurement was noted only with manual 2D measurement for both observers. However, 95% limits of agreement were wide for all the measurement methods. When categorized according to the optical colonoscopic measurement, manual 2D, 3D, and automated measurements showed "good" agreement. Although intraobserver and interobserver agreement was good with manual measurement, intraobserver and interobserver agreement was excellent with automated measurement. CONCLUSION: Manual 2D measurements demonstrated trends of better approximation to optical colonoscopy measurements than manual 3D or automated measurements. And automated measurement eliminated intraobserver and interobserver variability. For noninvasive CTC surveillance, manual 2D measurements are expected to measure medium-sized polyps with sufficient agreement with optical colonoscopic measurements and excellent intraobserver and interobserver variability, especially if combined with automated measurement.     

Importance of extracolonic findings at IV contrast medium-enhanced CT colonography versus those at non-enhanced CT colonography

To compare the clinical importance of extracolonic findings at intravenous (IV) contrast-enhanced CT colonography versus those at non-enhanced CT colonography. IV contrast medium-enhanced (n=72) and non-enhanced (n=30) multidetector CT colonography was performed in 102 symptomatic patients followed by conventional colonoscopy on the same day. The impact of extracolonic findings on further work up and treatment was assessed by a review of patient records. Extracolonic findings were divided into two groups: either leading to further work up respectively having an impact on therapy or not. A total of 303 extracolonic findings were detected. Of those, 71% (215/303) were found on IV contrast-enhanced CT, and 29% (88/303) were found on non-enhanced CT colonography. The extracolonic findings in 25% (26/102) of all patients led to further work up or had an impact on therapy. Twenty-two of these patients underwent CT colonography with IV contrast enhancement, and four without. The percentage of extracolonic findings leading to further work up or having an impact on therapy was higher for IV contrast-enhanced (31%; 22/72) than for non-enhanced (13%; 4/30) CT scans (P=0.12). IV contrast-enhanced CT colonography produced more extracolonic findings than non-enhanced CT colonography. A substantially greater proportion of findings on IV contrast-enhanced CT colonography led to further work up and treatment than did non-enhanced CT colonography.     

Automated volumetry at CT colonography: a phantom study

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To assess the performance of a computer-aided detection (CAD) algorithm for measuring polyp-like structures on CT colonography (CTC) images of a phantom. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We constructed a Plexiglas phantom to which we affixed a series of idealized Plexiglas polyp-like objects, including spheres and hemispheres. We imaged the phantom in a four-channel detector CT scanner at a 1.3 mm slice thickness with a reconstruction interval of 0.6 mm, using combinations of 100 mAs, 30 mAs, horizontal and vertical orientation. For each set of CT images, the interior surface of the phantom was segmented. The CAD algorithm was applied to the resulting surface to identify the polypoid regions of interest and to calculate their volume and maximum linear dimension. Calculated values were then compared with actual values to yield percent error in each measurement. RESULTS: The mean error in volume for the subgroups of spheres and hemispheres was 3% and 5% respectively. Mean error in linear dimension was approximately 2% for both shape subgroups. All CAD-calculated values were closely correlated with their respective actual values. Parameter selection did not significantly affect the accuracy of the calculated measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Our CAD software accurately measured the greatest linear dimension and the volume of each of the polyp-like structures in our phantom. Results were largely independent of phantom orientation and the CT exposure factors.     

CT colonography practice in the UK: a national survey

AIM: To determine the provision of computed tomography (CT) colonography in UK radiology departments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire relating to the availability of CT colonography, barriers to implementation, clinical indications, technique, and practitioners was posted to clinical directors of UK radiology departments. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-eight departments responded. Fifty (36%) offered CT colonography in day-to-day clinical practice. Of those that did not, 68 of 87 (64%) cited limited scanner capacity as the main barrier. Of the 50 departments offering a service, 39 (78%) offered CT after incomplete colonoscopy, 36 (72%), after failed barium enema, and 37 (74%) as an alternative to barium enema. Of those offering a service, the number of studies performed varied between one per month (38%) to more than one per day (8%). Total experience varied between 20 or fewer studies (28%) to more than 300 (12%). Full bowel preparation was common (92%), as was dual positioning (90%). Colonography was interpreted by radiologists with a subspecialty interest in gastrointestinal imaging in 64% of centres offering a service. CONCLUSION: CT colonography is widely available in the UK, with approximately one-third of responders offering a service. Experience and throughput varies considerably. Limited CT scanner capacity is the major barrier to further dissemination.     

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.     

CT colonography and MR colonography: current status, research directions and comparison

With the introduction of multidetector technology in CT and the moveable table with integrated coil modules in MRI, the concept of multiorgan screening has become realistic. CT colonography and MR colonography are new radiologic techniques that promise to be highly sensitive colorectal screening examinations. This article reviews the current status and research directions in CT colonography and MR colonography, and compares these methods. Received: 9 October 1999; Revised: 10 February 2000; Accepted: 10 February 2000     

Essential requirements of a CT colonography service

There are many potential challenges to developing a high quality, efficient CT colonography service. Some are clear and predictable, for example creating CT capacity and securing financial resources, but some are less obvious, such as harnessing local support or changing referral practice amongst clinical colleagues. Notwithstanding, such barriers will need to be overcome to deliver a well-resourced, successful CT colonography programme. This article utilises the authors’ experience of developing their own CT colonography service from scratch (now examining >1200 patients per annum) and relevant published articles on ‘Standards’ of practice and training to recommend how others might provide CT colonography in their own patient communities. We offer a practical guide and will emphasise the need for a multi-disciplinary approach with locally agreed protocols and service objectives.     

Straightening the colon with curved cross sections: An approach to CT colonography

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to straighten digitally and consistently the colon with curved cross sections and to compare the results with planar cross-section-based processing for computed tomographic (CT) colonography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In electric field-based straightening, curved cross sections are formed along electric force lines because of electric charges digitally distributed along the colon central path. Four straightening experiments were conducted on CT scans of a colonoscopy phantom. Representative images were studied for polyp detectability and feature distortion. Two further trials involved patient data to demonstrate the clinical feasibility of this method. RESULTS: In colon straightening with planar sections, a polyp was counted multiple times in both phantom and patient studies where the polyps were in central path turns with substantial curvature. Furthermore, opposite the central path turns, the colon walls were undersampled with planar sections. Straightening with curved sections produced consistent mappings. Image distortion was present in straightening with curved sections, but the conspicuity of polyps was maintained. In the soft-straightening process, trilinear interpolation greatly suppressed the surface- or volume-rendering noise associated with nearest neighbor interpolation. CONCLUSION: Straightening with curved sections outperforms straightening with planar sections in terms of polyp detectability. This approach eliminates the navigation difficulties of current CT colonography and may have clinical use.     

High positive predictive value of CT colonography in a referral centre

Aim

To assess the positive predictive value (PPV) of CTC in the clinical routine of a dedicated referral centre.

Material and methods

All consecutive patients referred for CTC between May 2009 and May 2010 were considered for inclusion in this study. All the patients who, following the diagnosis of a > 6 mm polyp or mass at CTC, underwent a post-CTC colonoscopy within eight weeks from diagnosis were included. Per patient PPV for lesions, adenomas and advanced neoplasia was calculated. Chi-square test was used for statistical comparison, and a p value <0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

Results

516 patients were included in the study. Of them, 76 (14%) patients had at least one lesion ≥6 mm on CTC. Overall, 59 (11%) patients were diagnosed at CTC with at least one polyp, 12 (2%) with a flat lesions, and 5 (1%) with a mass. Per-patient PPVs for any lesion >6 mm, neoplasia, and advanced neoplasia were 96% (95% CI: 92–100%), 68.4% (95% CI: 58–79%), and 30% (95% CI: 20–41%), respectively. PPV for neoplasia and advanced neoplasia was substantially higher for >10 mm lesions.

Conclusion

In dedicated centers, CTC appears to be a highly specific procedure, characterized by a very low rate of false-positive results for >6 mm lesions.     

Efficacy of IV Buscopan as a muscle relaxant in CT colonography

The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy of IV Buscopan as a muscle relaxant in CT colonography in terms of colonic distension and polyp detection, and to determine its particular efficacy in patients with diverticular disease. Seventy-three consecutive patients were randomised to receive IV Buscopan or no muscle relaxant prior to CT colonography. CT colonography was performed using a Siemens Somatom 4-detector multislice CT scanner. The following parameters were recorded: degree of colonic distension using a 4-point scale; diagnostic adequacy of colonic distension; presence or absence of diverticular disease; and presence of colonic polyps. Accuracy of polyp detection was assessed using subsequent conventional colonoscopy as a gold standard. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the number of segments that were deemed to be optimally or adequately distended (p=0.37). Although IV Buscopan did improve distension of certain segments, this effect was not sufficient to improve the number of diagnostically adequate studies in the Buscopan group (p=0.14). In patients with diverticular disease, IV Buscopan did not have any significant effect on segments affected by diverticulosis but was associated with an improvement in distension of more proximal segments. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of polyp detection (p=0.34). The addition of prone scanning to supine scanning was found to be the most useful technique for maximising colonic distension. Intravenous Buscopan at CT colonography does not improve the overall adequacy of colonic distension nor the accuracy of polyp detection. In patients with sigmoid diverticular disease IV Buscopan improves distension of more proximal colonic segments and may be useful in selected cases, but our results do not support its routine use for CT colonography.     

Computer-aided detection in CT colonography: initial clinical experience using a prototype system

Computer-aided detection (CAD) algorithms help to detect colonic polyps at CT colonography (CTC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of CAD versus an expert reader in CTC. One hundred forty individuals (67 men, 73 women; mean age, 59 years) underwent screening 64-MDCT colonography after full cathartic bowel cleansing without fecal tagging. One expert reader interpreted supine and prone scans using a 3D workstation with integrated CAD used as "second reader." The system's sensitivity for the detection of polyps, the number of false-positive findings, and its running time were evaluated. Polyps were classified as small (< or =5 mm), medium (6-9 mm), and large (> or =10 mm). A total of 118 polyps (small, 85; medium, 19; large, 14) were found in 56 patients. CAD detected 72 polyps (61%) with an average of 2.2 false-positives. Sensitivity was 51% (43/85) for small, 90% (17/19) for medium, and 86% (12/14) for large polyps. For all polyps, per-patient sensitivity was 89% (50/56) for the radiologist and 73% (41/56) for CAD. For large and medium polyps, per-patient sensitivity was 100% for the radiologist, and 96% for CAD. In conclusion, CAD shows high sensitivity in the detection of clinically significant polyps with acceptable false-positive rates.     

CT colonography with reduced bowel preparation after incomplete colonoscopy in the elderly

We prospectively assessed the feasibility and acceptance of computerized tomographic colonography (CTC) without bowel cathartic preparation in elderly patients after incomplete colonoscopy. A total of 136 patients underwent CTC without cathartic preparation. The time delay between conventional colonoscopy and CTC ranged between 3 and 20 days, depending on the clinical situation. Before CTC, fecal tagging was achieved by adding diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium to regular meals. CTCs were interpreted using a primary two-dimensional (2D) approach and 3D images for further characterization. Patients were interviewed before and 2 weeks after CTC to assess preparation acceptance. CTC was feasible and technically successful in all the 136 patients. Fecal tagging was judged as excellent in 113 (83%) patients and sufficient in 23 (17%). Average CT image interpretation time was 14.8 min. Six (4.4%) cases of colorectal cancer and nine (6.6%) large polyps were detected, as well as 23 (11.3%) extracolonic findings of high clinical importance. No major side effect occurred, although 25% patients reported minor side effects, especially diarrhea. Overall, 76/98 patients replied that they would be willing to repeat the test if necessary. CTC without cathartic preparation is a technically feasible and safe procedure to complete a colonic study in the elderly, prompting its use in clinical practice.     

CT colonography: methods,pathology and pitfalls

Computed tomography colonography (CTC) is a relatively new technique that is currently challenging more established methods of large bowel imaging. Several workers have suggested CTC surpasses the barium enema and approaches conventional endoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. Accurate diagnosis relies on technically good studies, the main aim of which is adequate bowel cleansing and distension. Furthermore, the learning curve is steep and normal colonic anatomy has to be re-learned in a CT context. This review aims to describe the technique, revise the imaging features of both normal and pathological colon, and to highlight potential diagnostic pitfalls and their avoidance.     

Efficacy of Barium-Based Fecal Tagging for CT Colonography: a Comparison between the Use of High and Low Density Barium Suspensions in a Korean Population - a Preliminary Study

Objective

This preliminarily study was designed to determine and to compare the efficacy of two commercially available barium-based fecal tagging agents for CT colonography (CTC) (high-density [40% w/v] and low-density [4.6% w/v] barium suspensions) in a population in Korea.

Materials and Methods

In a population with an identified with an average-risk for colorectal cancer, 15 adults were administered three doses of 20 ml 40% w/v barium for fecal tagging (group I) and 15 adults were administered three doses of 200 ml 4.6% w/v barium (group II) for fecal tagging. Excluding five patients in group I and one patient in group II that left the study, ten patients in group I and 14 patients in group II were finally included in the analysis. Two experienced readers evaluated the CTC images in consensus regarding the degree of tagging of stool pieces 6 mm or larger. Stool pieces were confirmed with the use of standardized CTC criteria or the absence of matched lesions as seen on colonoscopy. The rates of complete fecal tagging were analyzed on a per-lesion and a per-segment basis and were compared between the patients in the two groups.

Results

Per-lesion rates of complete fecal tagging were 52% (22 of 42; 95% CI, 37.7-66.6%) in group I and 78% (28 of 36; 95% CI, 61.7-88.5%) in group II. The difference between the two groups did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.285). The per-segment rates of complete tagging were 33% (6 of 18; 95% CI, 16.1%-56.4%) in group I and 60% (9 of 15; 95% CI, 35.7%-80.3%) in group II; again, the difference between the two groups did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.171).

Conclusion

Barium-based fecal tagging using both the 40% w/v and the 4.6% w/v barium suspensions showed moderate tagging efficacy. The preliminary comparison did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the tagging efficacy between the use of the two tagging agents, despite the tendency toward better tagging with the use of the 4.6% w/v barium suspension.     

Evaluation of colonic lesions and pitfalls in CT colonography: A systematic approach based on morphology,attenuation and mobility

Computed tomographic colonography is a reliable technique for the detection and classification of neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions of the colon. It is based on a thin-section CT dataset of the cleansed and air-distended colon, acquired in prone and supine position. Two-dimensional and 3D projections are used in combination for image interpretation. The evaluation of CT colonography datasets is based on two steps, lesion perception to detect a polyp candidate and image interpretation to correctly characterize colonic filling defects. A thorough knowledge of the morphologic and attenuation characteristics of common colonic lesions and artifacts facilitates characterization of the findings. The purpose of this review article is to give an overview of the key CT colonographic imaging criteria to correctly characterize common colorectal lesions and to identify typical pitfalls and pseudolesions.     

Assessment of polyp and mass histopathology by intravenous contrast-enhanced CT colonography

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: We sought to demonstrate that intravenous contrast-enhanced CT colonography (CTC) can distinguish colonic adenomas from carcinomas. METHODS: Supine intravenous contrast-enhanced CTC with colonoscopic and/or surgical correlation was performed on 25 patients with colonic adenomas or carcinomas. Standard deviation of mean polyp CT attenuation was computed and assessed using ANOVA and receiver-operating characteristic analyses. RESULTS: Colonoscopy confirmed 32 polyps or masses 1 to 8 cm in size. The standard deviations of CT attenuation were carcinomas (n = 13; 36 +/- 6 HU; range 28-48 HU) and adenomas (n = 19; 49 +/- 14 HU; range 31-100 HU) (P = 0.005). At a standard deviation threshold of 42 HU, the sensitivity and specificity for classifying a polyp or mass as a carcinoma were 92% and 79%, respectively. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.89 +/- 0.06 (95% confidence interval 0.73-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of the standard deviation of CT attenuation on intravenous contrast-enhanced CTC permits histopathologic classification of polyps 1 cm or larger as carcinomas versus adenomas. The presence of ulceration or absence of muscular invasion in carcinomas creates overlap with adenomas, reducing the specificity of carcinoma classification.     

CT Colonography: Role of a second reader CAD paradigm in the initial training of radiologists

Purpose

To evaluate the influence of CAD for the evaluation of CT colonography (CTC) datasets by inexperienced readers during the attendance of a dedicated hands-on training course.

Method and materials

Twenty-seven radiologists inexperienced in CTC (11 with no CTC training at all, 16 having previously reviewed no more than 10 CTC cases overall) attended a hands-on training course based on direct teaching on fifteen workstations (four Advantage Windows 4.4 with Colon VCAR software, GE; six CADCOLON, Im3D; five ColonScreen (Toshiba/Voxar) with ColonCAD™ API, Medicsight). During the course, readers were instructed to analyze 26 CTC cases including 38 colonic lesions obtained through low-dose MDCT acquisitions, consisting of 12 polyps sized less than 6 mm, 9 polyps sized between 6 and 10 mm, 12 polyps sized between 11 mm and 30 mm, and 5 colonic masses sized >3 cm. CTC images were reviewed by each reader both in 2D and 3D mode, respectively by direct evaluation of native axial images and MPR reconstructions, and virtual endoscopy or dissected views. Each reader had 15 min time for assessing each dataset without CAD, after which results were compared with those provided by CAD software. Global rater sensitivity for each lesion size before and after CAD usage was compared by means of two-tailed Student's t test, while sensitivity of each single reader before and after CAD usage was assessed with the McNemar test.

Results

For lesions sized <6 mm, global rater sensitivity was 0.1852 ± 0.1656 (mean ± SD) before CAD-assisted reading and 0.2345 ± 0.1761 after CAD (p = 0.0018). For lesions sized 6-9 mm, sensitivity was 0.2870 ± 0.1016 before CAD-assisted reading and 0.3117 ± 0.1099 after CAD (p = 0.0027). For lesions sized 10-30 mm, sensitivity was 0.5308 ± 0.2120 before CAD-assisted reading and 0.5637 ± 0.2133 after CAD (p = 0.0086), while for lesions sized >30 mm, sensitivity before CAD-assisted reading was 0.3556 ± 0.3105 and did not change after CAD usage (p = 1). Sensitivity of each single rater did not significantly differ before and after CAD for any lesion size category (McNemar test, p > 0.05). Specificity was not significantly different before and after CAD for any lesion size (>96% for all size categories).

Conclusion

CAD usage led to increased overall sensitivity of inexperienced readers for all polyps sizes, except for lesions >30 mm, but sensitivity of individual raters was not significantly higher compared with CAD-unassisted reading.     

Comparison of axial, coronal, and primary 3D review in MDCT colonography for the detection of small polyps: a phantom study

Purpose

The purpose of this phantom study is to compare the influence of the reading technique (axial images alone in comparison to 3D endoluminal, coronal, and combined 2D/3D review methods) on the sensitivity and inter-reader variability with MDCT colonography for the detection of small colonic polyps.

Methods

An anthropomorphic pig colon phantom with 75 randomly distributed simulated small polyps of 2–8 mm size, was distended with air and scanned in a water phantom using multidetector-row CT with 4 mm × 1 mm collimation. Three radiologists rated the presence of polyps on a five-point scale. Performance with axial sections alone was compared to the performance with coronal sections, virtual endoscopy (VE), and a combined 2D/3D approach. We calculated sensitivities for polyp detection and used ROC analysis for data evaluation.

Results

There was no significant difference between the mean area under the curve (A_z) for axial images and VE (A_z = 0.934 versus 0.932), whereas coronal images were significantly inferior (A_z = 0.876) to both. The combined 2D/3D approach yielded the best results, with an A_z of 0.99. Differences in sensitivity between individual readers were significant in axial images (sensitivity, 75–93%, p = 0.001) and coronal images (sensitivity, 69–80%, p = 0.028), but became non-significant with VE (83–88%, p = 0.144) and the combined 2D/3D approach (95–97%, p = 0.288).

Conclusion

Evaluation of axial sections alone leads to significant differences in detection rates between individual observers. A combined 2D/3D evaluation improves sensitivities for polyp detection and reduces inter-individual differences to an insignificant level.     

Optimization of scanning parameters for multi-slice CT colonography: experiments with synthetic and animal phantoms

AIM: To determine the optimal collimation, pitch, tube current and reconstruction interval for multi-slice computed tomography (CT) colonography with regard to attaining satisfactory image quality while minimizing patient radiation dose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multi-slice CT was performed on plastic, excised pig colon and whole pig phantoms to determine optimal settings. Performance was judged by detection of simulated polyps and statistical measures of the image parameters. Fat and muscle conspicuity was measured from images of dual tube-current prone/supine patient data to derive a measure of tube current effects on tissue contrast. RESULTS: A collimation of 4 x 2.5 mm was sufficient for detection of polyps 4 mm and larger, provided that a reconstruction interval of 1.25 mm was used. A pitch of 1.5 allowed faster scanning and reduced radiation dose without resulting in a loss of important information, i.e. detection of small polyps, when compared with a pitch of 0.75. Tube current and proportional radiation dose could be lowered substantially without deleterious effects on the detection of the air-mucosal interface, however, increased image noise substantially reduced conspicuity of different tissues. CONCLUSION: An optimal image acquisition set-up of 4 x 2.5 mm collimation, reconstruction interval of 1.25 mm, pitch of 1.5 and dual prone/supine scan of 40/100 mA tube current is proposed for our institution for scanning symptomatic patients. Indications are that where CT colonography is used for colonic polyp screening in non-symptomatic patients, a 40 mA tube current could prove satisfactory for both scans.