Nonadenomatous polyps at CT colonography: prevalence, size distribution, and detection rates

PURPOSE: To prospectively investigate with computed tomographic (CT) colonography the prevalence and size distribution of nonadenomatous polyps in asymptomatic adults and to compare the detection rates of adenomatous and nonadenomatous polyps. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1233 asymptomatic adults (mean age, 57.8 years; 505 women, 728 men) underwent same-day CT colonography and optical colonoscopy procedures. CT colonoscopy studies were interpreted prospectively with a primary three-dimensional approach immediately before optical colonoscopy. Statistical analysis was performed with the chi(2) test. Size, prevalence, and by-polyp detection differences were compared between adenomatous and nonadenomatous polyps. RESULTS: Seven hundred fifty-six (57.7%) colorectal polyps identified at optical colonoscopy in 410 (33.3%) patients were nonadenomatous; of these lesions, 622 (82.3%) were diminutive (相似文献   

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.     

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.     

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.     

Detection of flat colorectal polyps at screening CT colonography in comparison with conventional polypoid lesions

Background Although the screening of small, flat polyps is clinically important, the role of CT colonography (CTC) screening in their detection has not been thoroughly investigated. Purpose To evaluate the detection capability and usefulness of CTC in the screening of flat and polypoid lesions by comparing CTC with optic colonoscopy findings as the gold standard. Material and Methods We evaluated the CTC detection capability for flat colorectal polyps with a flat surface and a height not exceeding 3 mm (n = 42) by comparing to conventional polypoid lesions (n = 418) according to the polyp diameter. Four types of reconstruction images including multiplanar reconstruction, volume rendering, virtual gross pathology, and virtual endoscopic images were used for visual analysis. We compared the abilities of the four reconstructions for polyp visualization. Results Detection sensitivity for flat polyps was 31.3%, 44.4%, and 87.5% for lesions measuring 2-3 mm, 4-5 mm, and ≥6 mm, respectively; the corresponding sensitivity for polypoid lesions was 47.6%, 79.0%, and 91.7%. The overall sensitivity for flat lesions (47.6%) was significantly lower than polypoid lesions (64.1%). Virtual endoscopic imaging showed best visualization among the four reconstructions. Colon cancers were detected in eight patients by optic colonoscopy, and CTC detected colon cancers in all eight patients. Conclusion CTC using 64-row multidetector CT is useful for colon cancer screening to detect colorectal polyps while the detection of small, flat lesions is still challenging.     

CT colonography in 546 patients with incomplete colonoscopy

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate the positive predictive value (PPV) of computed tomographic (CT) colonography performed in patients who were referred for further examination after incomplete colonoscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was waived. We identified 546 consecutive patients (mean age, 64.1 years; 401 [73.4%] women) who underwent CT colonography after incomplete colonoscopy between November 1999 and December 2002. A retrospective chart review was performed if CT colonography depicted endoscopically nonvisualized lesions 6 mm or greater in diameter. Repeat colonoscopy rate, endoluminal findings, and PPV of CT colonography were determined. Subsequent colonoscopic findings were used as the reference standard. RESULTS: In 72 (13.2%) patients, CT colonography depicted 88 endoscopically nonvisualized lesions 6 mm or greater. Of 11 patients reported to have 12 masses (> or =20 mm), at subsequent colonoscopy, one patient had no mass. Eighteen patients had 23 large (10-19-mm) polyps that they were suspected of having, and 47 patients had 53 medium (6-9-mm) polyps that they were suspected of having. At a median follow-up of 31 months (range, 6-42 months), 45 (63%) of 72 patients underwent follow-up colonoscopy because of their CT colonographic findings. Rates of repeat colonoscopy for masses, large polyps, and medium polyps were 100%, 94%, and 45%, respectively. Per-patient and per-lesion PPVs of CT colonography for masses, large polyps, and medium polyps were 90.9% and 91.7%, 64.7% and 70%, and 33.3% and 30.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: CT colonography has the potential to become an accepted technique for evaluation of the nonvisualized part of the colon after incomplete colonoscopy, and it can increase the diagnostic yield of masses and clinically important polyps in this part of the colon.     

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     

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。     

CT colonography: multiobserver diagnostic performance

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate multiobserver diagnostic performance and reader agreement for colorectal polyp detection in a well-characterized cohort of patients with increased number of polyps, compared with an average-risk patient, with colonoscopy as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cohort of 70 patients suspected of having polyps was examined with spiral computed tomographic (CT) colonography, with colonoscopy performed the same day. After air insufflation per rectum, supine and prone images were obtained with single-detector row CT (5-mm collimation, 8-mm table increment, 2-mm reconstruction interval). Images were analyzed independently by four experienced abdominal radiologists using two-dimensional multiplanar reformation followed by selective use of three-dimensional endoscopic volume-rendered images. Data were analyzed both per polyp and per patient. RESULTS: Analysis per polyp demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 0.68 for lesions 10 mm or larger (n = 40), with 75% agreement among the four readers. Analysis per patient demonstrated improved detection and agreement, with a pooled sensitivity of 0.88 for patients with polyps or cancers 10 mm or larger (n = 28), with 94% agreement. When sensitivity and receiver operating characteristic analyses were analyzed per polyp size threshold, results among readers converged and peaked at polyp diameters of approximately 10 mm. CONCLUSION: In this patient cohort, diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement with single-detector row CT colonography was sufficient for detection of patients with lesions 10 mm or larger, with more variable results for smaller polyps.     

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.     

CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a practical approach for population screening

CT colonography (CTC), also known as virtual colonoscopy, is a minimally invasive test for the detection of colorectal polyps and masses. At the authors' institution, asymptomatic screening has been the overwhelming indication for CTC referral since local third-party coverage was initiated in April 2004. This practical review details the authors' current approach to CTC screening, which has evolved and matured over time. It discusses the entire spectrum from program set-up through patient disposition following CTC examination. The authors hope this article will provide a roadmap for radiologists who wish to institute a CTC screening program.     

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.     

Nationwide,Longitudinal Trends in CT Colonography Utilization: Cross-Sectional Survey Results From the 2010 and 2015 National Health Interview Survey

PurposeColon cancer screening reduces deaths from colorectal cancer. Screening rates have plateaued; however, studies have found that giving patients a choice between different screening tests improves adherence. CT colonography is a minimally invasive screening test with high sensitivity for colonic polyps (>1 cm). With increasing insurance coverage of CT colonography nationwide, there are limited estimates of CT colonography utilization over time. Our purpose was to estimate CT colonography utilization over time using nationally representative cross-sectional survey data.MethodsWe utilized 2010 and 2015 National Health Interview Survey cross-sectional data. Participants between ages 50 and 75 without colorectal cancer history were included. Accounting for complex survey design elements, logistic regression analyses evaluated changes in CT colonography utilization over time, adjusted for potential confounders, and stratified by insurance and age.ResultsOverall, 21,686 respondents were included (8,965 in 2010, 12,721 in 2015). Reported CT colonography utilization decreased from 1.2% to 0.9% (odds ratio [OR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-0.98). Stratified analyses revealed no changes in utilization in patients with private insurance (P = .35) and in patients younger than 65 (P = .07). Overall awareness of CT colonography decreased from 20.5% to 15.9% (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.91-0.95). Reported optical colonoscopy utilization increased from 57.9% to 63.6% (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.05).ConclusionDespite increasing self-reported utilization of optical colonoscopy from 2010 to 2015, survey results suggest that CT colonography awareness (～16%) and utilization (～1%) remain low. Improved public awareness and coverage expansion to Medicare-aged populations will promote improved CT colonography utilization and overall colorectal cancer screening rates.     

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.     

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.     

Detection of colorectal lesions: lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy

PURPOSE: To compare the performance of lower-dose multi-detector row helical computed tomographic (CT) colonography with that of conventional colonoscopy in the detection of colorectal lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred fifty-eight patients underwent multi-detector row helical CT colonography (beam collimation, 4 x 2.5 mm; table feed, 17.5 mm/sec; voltage, 140 kV; and effective dose, 10 mAs) followed by conventional colonoscopy. Conventional colonoscopy served as the reference standard. Two radiologists interpreted CT colonographic images to assess the presence of polyps or carcinomas. Sensitivity was calculated on both a per-polyp and a per-patient basis. In the latter, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were also calculated. Weighted CT dose index was calculated on the basis of measurements obtained in a standard body phantom. Effective dose was estimated by using commercially available software. RESULTS: CT colonography correctly depicted all 22 carcinomas (sensitivity, 100%) and 52 of 74 polyps (sensitivity, 70.3%). Sensitivity for detection was 100% in all 13 polyps 10 mm or larger in diameter, 83.3% in 20 of 24 polyps 6-9 mm, and 51.3% in 19 of 37 lesions 5 mm or smaller. With regard to the per-patient analysis, CT colonography had a sensitivity of 96.0%, a specificity of 96.6%, a positive predictive value of 94.1%, and a negative predictive value of 97.7%. The total weighted CT dose index for combined prone and supine acquisitions was 2.74 mGy. The simulated effective doses for complete CT colonography were 1.8 mSv in men and 2.4 mSv in women. CONCLUSION: Lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography ensures substantial dose reduction while maintaining excellent sensitivity for detection of colorectal carcinomas and polyps larger than 6 mm in diameter.     

Colorectal neoplasia screening with CT colonography in average-risk asymptomatic subjects: community-based study

PURPOSE: To evaluate computed tomographic (CT) colonography as a screening tool for average-risk asymptomatic subjects with regard to participation, acceptability, and safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT colonography for colorectal neoplasia screening was offered to 2,000 subjects aged 50-54 and 65-69 years. Only asymptomatic subjects at average risk of colorectal neoplasia were enrolled. Participants underwent CT colonography followed by colonoscopy if CT colonography findings showed any polyps. Acceptability was measured with a 100-point (0, most favorable; 100, least favorable) visual analogue scale (VAS). Chi2 statistic was used to compare participation rates among subgroups. Safety of CT colonography was evaluated by recording all important adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 1,452 subjects were eligible for screening. The adjusted participation rate was 28.4%. Participation was higher in younger subjects and in those from a high socioeconomic region. Major reasons for nonparticipation were insufficient time and perceived good health. Median VAS scores for pain, general satisfaction, embarrassment, and willingness to repeat screening were 13, 6, 8, and 5, respectively. Most subjects found CT colonography better than (60%) or same as (32%) expected. Ninety-three (27.4%) of 340 subjects were referred for colonoscopy, with polyps found in 67 (positive predictive value, 0.73). By adopting criteria that a positive finding at CT colonography is that of a single polyp larger than 5 mm or multiple polyps larger than 2 mm, 14% of CT examinations would have led to colonoscopy; 5.7% of CT findings were false-positive, with no significant impairment in large polyp detection. There were no important adverse events related to CT colonography, although four subjects had syncope or presyncope related to bowel preparation. CONCLUSION: Community-based colorectal neoplasia screening with CT colonography was accompanied by a participation rate that compares favorably with that of similar screening programs. CT colonography was highly acceptable to participants.     

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.     

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.     

Colonic masses: detection with MR colonography

PURPOSE: To assess magnetic resonance (MR) colonography as a method for detection of colorectal masses, with conventional colonoscopy as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MR colonography was performed in 132 patients referred for colonoscopy because of the possible presence of a mass. After rectal filling with a gadopentetate dimeglumine and water enema, T1-weighted three-dimensional gradient-echo MR studies were acquired with the patient in the prone and supine positions. Water-sensitive single-shot fast spin-echo MR images were also obtained. Surface-rendered virtual endoscopic endoluminal views, orthogonal sections in three planes, and water-sensitive MR images were interactively assessed for presence of colorectal masses by two radiologists. RESULTS: MR colonography was well tolerated without sedation or analgesia. MR image quality was sufficient for diagnosis in 127 (96%) patients. Most small (10-mm) lesions were correctly identified. For these large masses, MR colonography had a sensitivity of 93%, specificity of 99%, positive predictive value of 92%, and negative predictive value of 98% for detection of masses. CONCLUSION: MR colonography is a promising modality for help in detecting colorectal mass lesions larger than 10 mm in diameter.