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

Clinical Radiology

Volumn 58, Issue 11, 2003, Pages 855-861

  Taylor, S A ^a   Halligan, S ^a   Saunders, B P ^a   Morley, S ^a   Riesewyk, C ^a   Atkin, W ^a   Bartram, C I ^a  

^a ST MARK S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Colon; Colonoscopy; CT; Diagnosis; Hospital standards; Neoplasms; Outpatient clinics

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; COLON POLYP; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTESTINE EXAMINATION; KIDNEY CANCER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MORPHOLOGY; PATIENT REFERRAL; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYMPTOM; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; TUMOR VOLUME;

EID: 0242300083     PISSN: 00099260     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0009-9260(03)00273-3     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Department of Health, The New NHS - Modern, Dependable. London: HMSO, 1997.
2. Referral guidelines for suspected cancer. London. Department of Health. Health Service Circular, Nov 1999: HSC 1999/241:19.
3. Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, ACPGBI Referral guidelines for colorectal cancer. Colorect Dis, 2002;4: 287-297.
4. Mihssin M, Morrell V, Debney N, et al. Prospective evaluation of introduction of 2-week referral pathway for colorectal patients in Torbay. Colorect Dis, 2001;3(Suppl. 1):33.
5. Eccersley A, Wilson E, Makris A, Novell J. Referral guidelines for colorectal cancer: do they work? Colorect Dis, 2001;3(Suppl. 1):34.
6. Flashman K, Faux W, O'Leary D, et al. Diagnostic yields of the six Department of Health (DOH) higher risk criteria for the two week standard clinic (TWSC). Colorect Dis, 2002;4(Suppl. 1):48.
7. Gandy C, Morrell V, Pullan R, Defriend D. Does the two-week rule for colorectal cancer provide benefit for patients? Colorect Dis, 2002; 4(Suppl. 1):47.
8. Pignone M, Rich M, Teutsch SM, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer in adults at average risk: a summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med, 2002;137:132-141.
9. Yano H, Iishi H, Tatsuta M, et al. Oxygen desaturation during sedation for colonoscopy in elderly patients. Hepatogastroenterology, 1998;45: 2138-2141.
10. Lukens FJ, Loeb DS, Machicao VI, et al. Colonoscopy in octogenarians: a prospective outpatient study. Am J Gastroenterol, 2002;97: 1722-1725.
11. Boweles C, Leicester R, Swarbuck E, et al. Intercollegiate-BSG National Colonoscopy (IBNC) Audit: methods used to identify the caecum and caecal intubation rate. Gut, 2001;48(Suppl.):A10.
12. Winawer SJ, Stewart ET, Zauber AG, et al. A comparison of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium enema for surveillance after polypectomy. National Polyp Study Work Group. N Engl J Med, 2000; 342:1766-1772.
13. Svensson MH, Svensson E, Lasson A, Hellstrom M. Patient acceptance of CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy: prospective comparative study in patients with or suspected of having colorectal disease. Radiology, 2002;222:337-345.
14. Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy PC, III, et al. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med, 1999;341:1496-1503.
15. Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, et al. Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonograpby for detection in 300 patients. Radiology, 2001;219:685-692.
16. Macari M, Bini EJ, Xue X, et al. Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thin-section low-dose multi-detector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection. Radiology, 2002; 224:383-392.
17. Laghi A, Iannaccone R, Carbone I, et al. Detection of colorectal lesions with virtual computed tomographic colonography. Am J Surg, 2002; 183:124-131.
18. Fenlon HM, Clarke PD, Ferrucci JT. Virtual colonoscopy: imaging features with colonoscopic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1998; 170:1303-1309
19. Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, et al. CT colonography: potential pitfalls and problem-solving techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1999;172:1271-1278.
20. Macari M, Megibow AJ. Pitfalls of using three-dimensional CT colonography with two-dimensional imaging correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2001;176:137-143.
21. Falterman KW, Hill CB, Markey JC, et al. Cancer of the colon, rectum, and anus: a review of 2313 cases. Cancer, 1974;34(Suppl.):9.
22. Spurgeon P, Barwell F, Kerr D. Waiting times for cancer patients in England after general practitioners' referrals: retrospective national survey. BMJ, 2000;320:838-839.
23. Pescatore P, Glucker T, Delarive J, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement of CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). Gut, 2000;47:126-130.
24. Gluecker T, Meuwly JY, Pescatore P, et al. Effect of investigator experience in CT colonography. Eur Radiol, 2002;12:1405-1409.
25. Church J, Oakley J, Milsom J, et al. Colonoscopy training: the need for patience (patients). A NZ J Surg, 2002;72:89-91.
26. Dachman AH, Kuniyoshi JK, Boyle CM, et al. CT colonography with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1998;171:989-995.
27. de Zwart IM, Griffioen G, Shaw MP, et al. Barium enema and endoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasia: sensitivity, specificity, complications and its determinants. Clin Radiol, 2001;56: 401-409.
28. Leslie A, Virjee JP. Detection of colorectal carcinoma on double contrast barium enema when double reporting is routinely performed: an audit of current practice. Clin Radiol, 2002;57:184-187.
29. Culpan DG, Mitchell AJ, Hughes S, et al. Double contrast barium enema sensitivity: a comparison of studies by radiographers and radiologists. Clin Radiol, 2002;57:604-607.
30. Morrin MM, Kruskal JB, Farrell RJ, et al. Endoluminal CT colonography after an incomplete endoscopic colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1999;172:913-918.
31. Macari M, Berman P, Dicker M, et al. Usefulness of CT colonography in patients with incomplete colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1999; 173:561-564.
32. Chen SC, Lu DS, Hecht JR, Kadell BM. CT colonography: value of scanning in both the supine and prone positions. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1999;172:595-599.
33. Ghahremani GG, Dowlatshahi K. Colorectal carcinomas: diagnostic implications of their changing frequency and anatomic distribution. World J Surg, 1989;13:321-324.
34. Hara AK, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ. Incidental extracolonic findings at CT colonography. Radiology, 2000;215: 353-357.
35. Edwards JT, Wood CJ, Mendelson RM, Forbes GM. Extracolonic findings at virtual colonoscopy: implications for screening programs. Am J Gastroenterol, 2001;96:3009-3012.
36. Morrin MM, Farrell RJ, Kruskal JB, et al. Utility of intravenously administered contrast material at CT colonography. Radiology, 2000; 217:765-771.
37. Amin Z, Boulos PB, Lees WR. Technical report: spiral CT pneumocolon for suspected colonic neoplasms. Clin Radiol, 1996;51: 56-61.