Assessment of two 3D MDCT colonography protocols for observation of colorectal polyps

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 186, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 85-89

  Yasumoto, Taku ^a   Murakami, Takamichi ^b   Yamamoto, Hiroshi ^c   Hori, Masatoshi ^b   Iannaccone, Riccardo ^d   Kim, Tonsok ^b   Abe, Hisashi ^b   Kuwabara, Masatomo ^b   Yamasaki, Koichi ^c   Kikkawa, Nobuteru ^c   Arimoto, Hiroshi ^c   Passariello, Roberto ^d   Nakamura, Hironobu ^b  

^a Suita Municipal Hospital   (Japan)

^b OSAKA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^c Minoh Municipal Hospital   (Japan)

^d SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

3D navigation; Colorectal cancer; CT colonography; MDCT

Indexed keywords

GLUCAGON; GLUCAGON G NOVO; MACROGOL; MAGNESIUM CITRATE; MIDAZOLAM; SCOPOLAMINE BUTYL BROMIDE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COLON POLYP; COLONOSCOPE; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL DISEASE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTESTINAL SPASM; INTESTINE MOTILITY; INTESTINE PREPARATION; MALE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RECTUM POLYP; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VIDEORECORDING; COLORECTAL TUMOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; RADIOGRAPHY; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 33644845510     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.04.1727     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy PC 3rd, Barish MA, Clarke PD, Ferrucci JT. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med 1999; 341:1496-1503
2. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. Detection of colorectal lesions: lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 2003; 229:775-781
3. Macari M, Milano A, Lavelle M, Berman P, Megibow AJ. Comparison of time-efficient CT colonography with two- and three-dimensional colonic evaluation for detecting colorectal polyps. AJR 2000; 174:1543-1549
4. Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Welch TJ, et al. Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients. Radiology 2000; 216:704-711
5. Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, et al. Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology 2001; 219:685-692
6. Dachman AH, Kuniyoshi JK, Boyle CM, et al. CT colonography with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps. AJR 1998; 171:989-995
7. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003; 349:2191-2200
8. Morrin MM, LaMont JT. Screening virtual colonoscopy: ready for prime time? N Engl J Med 2003; 349:2261-2264
9. World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects, revised. Edinburgh, Scotland: World Medical Association, 2000
10. Chakraborty D. Statistical power in observer-performance studies: comparison of the receiver operating characteristic and free-response methods in tasks involving localization. Acad Radiol 2002; 9:147-156
11. Chakraborty DP, Winter LH. Free-response methodology: alternate analysis and a new observer-performance experiment. Radiology 1990; 174(3 pt 1):873-881
12. McFarland EG, Pilgram TK, Brink JA, et al. CT colonography: multiobserver diagnostic performance. Radiology 2002; 225:380-390
13. Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, Wilson LA, et al. Prospective blinded evaluation of computed tomographic colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2003; 125:311-319
14. Lui YW, Macari M, Israel G, Bini EJ, Wang H, Babb J. CT colonography data interpretation: effect of different section thicknesses - preliminary observations. Radiology 2003; 229:791-797
15. Lefere PA, Gryspeerdt SS, Dewyspelaere J, Baekelandt M, Van Holsbeeck BG. Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT colonography: initial results polyp detection and patient acceptance. Radiology 2002; 224:393-403
16. Chen SC, Lu DS, Hecht JR, Kadell BM. CT colonography: value of scanning in both the supine and prone positions. AJR 1999; 172:595-599
17. Yee J, Kumar NN, Hung RK, Akerkar GA, Kumar PR, Wall SD. Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography. Radiology 2003; 226:653-661
18. Macari M, Bini EJ, Jacobs SL, et al. Colorectal polyps and cancers in asymptomatic average-risk patients: evaluation with CT colonography. Radiology 2004; 230:629-636
19. Hoppe H, Quattropani C, Spreng A, Mattich J, Netzer P, Dinkel HP. Virtual colon dissection with CT colonography compared with axial interpretation and conventional colonoscopy: preliminary results. AJR 2004; 182:1151-1158
20. Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT, et al. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997; 112:24-28
21. Pickhardt PJ. Three-dimensional endoluminal CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): comparison of three commercially available systems. AJR 2003; 181:1599-1606
22. Hara AK, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ, McCollough, Harmsen WS. CT colonography: single- versus multi-detector row imaging. Radiology 2001; 219:461-465
23. McFarland EG, Brink JA, Pilgram TK, et al. Spiral CT colonography: reader agreement and diagnostic performance with two- and three-dimensional image-display techniques. Radiology 2001; 218:375-383
24. Neri E, Giusti P, Battolla L, et al. Colorectal cancer: role of CT colonography in preoperative evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy. Radiology 2002; 223:615-619
25. Ginnerup Pedersen B, Christiansen TE, Bjerregaard NC, Ljungmann K, Laurberg S. Colonoscopy and multidetector-array computed-tomographic colonography: detection rates and feasibility. Endoscopy 2003; 35:736-742
26. Dachman AH, Zalis ME. Quality and consistency in CT colonography and research reporting. Radiology 2004; 230:319-323