首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Computerized tomographic colonography: performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting
Authors:Johnson C Daniel,Toledano Alicia Y,Herman Benjamin A,Dachman Abraham H,McFarland Elizabeth G,Barish Matthew A,Brink James A,Ernst Randy D,Fletcher Joel G,Halvorsen Robert A,Hara Amy K,Hopper Kenneth D,Koehler Robert E,Lu David S k,Macari Michael,Maccarty Robert L,Miller Frank H,Morrin Martina,Paulson Erik K,Yee Judy,Zalis Michael  American College of Radiology Imaging Network A
Affiliation:Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.
Abstract:BACKGROUND & AIMS: No multicenter study has been reported evaluating the performance and interobserver variability of computerized tomographic colonography. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of computerized tomographic colonography for detecting clinically important colorectal neoplasia (polyps >or=10 mm in diameter) in a multi-institutional study. METHODS: A retrospective study was developed from 341 patients who had computerized tomographic colonography and colonoscopy among 8 medical centers. Colonoscopy and pathology reports provided the standard. A random sample of 117 patients, stratified by criterion standard, was requested. Ninety-three patients were included (47% with polyps >or=10 mm; mean age, 62 years; 56% men; 84% white; 40% reported colorectal symptoms; 74% at increased risk for colorectal cancer). Eighteen radiologists blinded to the criterion standard interpreted computerized tomography colonography examinations, each using 2 of 3 different software display platforms. RESULTS: The average area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for identifying patients with at least 1 lesion >or=10 mm was 0.80 (95% lower confidence bound, 0.74). The average sensitivity and specificity were 75% (95% lower confidence bound, 68%) and 73% (95% lower confidence bound, 66%), respectively. Per-polyp sensitivity was 75%. A trend was observed for better performance with more observer experience. There was no difference in performance across software display platforms. CONCLUSIONS: Computerized tomographic colonography performance compared favorably with reported performance of fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and barium enema. A prospective study evaluating the performance of computerized tomography colonography in a screening population is indicated.
Keywords:AUC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve   CI, confidence interval   CRC, colorectal cancer   CT, computerized tomography   LCB, lower confidence bound
本文献已被 ScienceDirect PubMed 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号