Potentially serious adverse events at CT colonography in symptomatic patients: National survey of the United Kingdom

Radiology

Volumn 239, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 464-471

  Burling, David ^a   Halligan, Steve ^a   Slater, Andrew ^a   Noakes, Michael J ^a   Taylor, Stuart A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COLON PERFORATION; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; DISEASE SEVERITY; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; LAPAROTOMY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; SYMPTOM; UNITED KINGDOM;

COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; DATA COLLECTION; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; INJURY SEVERITY SCORE; INTESTINAL PERFORATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 33646147154     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2392051101     Document Type: Review

References (21)

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. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomogrnphic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2191-2200.
3. Svensson MH, Svensson G, 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.
4. Gluecker TM, Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, et al. Colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography, colonoscopy, and double contrast barium enema examination: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences. Radiology 2003;227:378-384.
5. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Saunders BP, Bassett P, Vance M, Bartram CI. Acceptance by patients of multidetector CT colonograpby compared with barium enema examinations, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181(4):913-921.
6. Edwards JT, Mendelson RM, Fritschi L, et al. Colorectal neoplasia screening with CT colonography in average-risk asymptomatic subjects: community-based study. Radiology 2004;230:459-464.
7. Garvican L. Planning for a possible national colorectal cancer screening programme. J Med Screen 1998;5:187-194.
8. Kamar M, Portnoy O, Bar-Dayan A, et al. Actual colonic perforation in virtual colonoscopy: report of a case. Dis Colon Rectum 2004;47:1242-1244.
9. Coady-Fariborzian L, Angel LP, Procaccino JA. Perforated colon secondary to virtual colonoscopy: report of a case. Dis Colon Rectum 2004;47:1247-1249.
10. Sosna J, Blachar A, Amitai M, Bar-Ziv J. Assessment of the risk of perforation at CT colonography [abstr]. Eur Radiol 2005; 1S(suppl 3):16.
11. Bowles CJ, Leicester R, Romaya C, Swarbrick E, Williams CB, Epstein O. A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow? Gut 2004;53:277-283.
12. Burling D, Halligan S. Tnylor SA, Usiskin S, Bartram CI. CT colonography practice in the United Kingdom: a national survey. Clin Radiol 2004;59:39-43.
13. Babbie E. The practice of social research. 4th ed. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth, 1979.
14. Sosna J, Bar-Meir K, Amitai M, Blachar A, Peled N. Assessment of the risk of perforation at CT colonography (abstr). In: Radiological Society of North America scientific assembly and annual meeting program. Oak Brook, III: Radiological Society of North America, 2004; 280.
15. Nelson DB, McQuaid KR, Bond JH, Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Johnson TK. Procedural success iind complications of large scale screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;55:307-314.
16. Blakeborough A, Sheridan MB, Chapman AH. Complications of barium enema examinations: a survey of consultant radiologists 1992-1994. Clin Radiol 1997;52:142-148.
17. Blakeborough A, Sheridan MB, Chapman AH. Retention balloon catheters and barium enemas: attitudes, current practice, and relative safety in the UK. Clin Radiol 1997;52: 62-64.
18. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Goh V, et al. Optimizing colonic distension for multi-detector row CT colonography: effect of hyoscine hydrobromide and rectal balloon catheter. Radiology 2003;229:99-108.
19. Burling D, Taylor SA, Halligan S, et al. Automated colonic insufflation for multi-detector row CT colonography: distension and patient experience in comparison to manual carbon dioxide insufflation [abstr]. Eur Radiol 2005; 15(suppl 3):40.
20. Yee J, Galdino G, Kumar N. Comparison of colonic distention using electronic CO2 insufflation and manual atmospheric insufflation on CT colonography (abstr). Radiology 2002;225(P):305.
21. Rogalla P, Buknecht HC, Hein PA, Rueckert JC, Lembcke A, Hamm B. Pressure-controlled colonic insufflation for CT colonography. In: Radiological Society of North America scientific assembly and annual meeting program (abstr). Oak Brook, III: Radiological Society of North America, 2004; 432.