CT colonography: automatic measurement of polyp diameter compared with manual assessment - an in-vivo study

Clinical Radiology

Volumn 62, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 145-151

  Burling, D ^a   Halligan, S ^a   Taylor, S A ^a   Honeyfield, L ^a   Roddie, M E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; COLON POLYP; COLONOSCOPY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; IN VIVO STUDY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEASUREMENT; MEASUREMENT ERROR; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANK SUM TEST; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TUMOR VOLUME;

COLON; COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLONOSCOPY; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; OBSERVER VARIATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 33845863940     PISSN: 00099260     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2006.09.018     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Pickhardt P.J., Choi J.R., Hwang I., et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 349 (2003) 2191-2200
2. Fenlon H.M., Nunes D.P., Schroy III P.C., et al. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med 341 (1999) 1496-1503
3. Morson B.C. Evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum. Cancer 34 Suppl (1974) 9
4. Hofstad B., Almendingen K., Vatn M., et al. Growth and recurrence of colorectal polyps: a double-blind 3-year intervention with calcium and antioxidants. Digestion 59 (1998) 148-156
5. Waye J.D., Lewis B.S., Frankel A., et al. Small colon polyps. Am J Gastroenterol 83 (1988) 120-122
6. Stryker S.J., Wolff B.G., Culp C.E., et al. Natural history of untreated colonic polyps. Gastroenterology 93 (1987) 1009-1013
7. Zalis M.E., Barish M.A., Choi J.R., et al. CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal. Radiology 236 (2005) 3-9
8. Pickhardt P.J., Lee A.D., McFarland E.G., et al. Linear polyp measurement at CT colonography: in vitro and in vivo comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional displays. Radiology 236 (2005) 872-878
9. Burling D., Halligan S., Taylor S.A., et al. Polyp size measurement by CT colonography: effect of viewing conditions on inter- and intra-observer agreement, and agreement with colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186 (2006) 1597-1604
10. Sorstedt E., Persson A., Noren B., et al. Computed tomographic colonography: comparison of two workstations. Acta Radiol 46 (2005) 671-678
11. Burling D, Halligan S, Altman DG, et al. Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography: effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting. Eur Radiol (in press).
12. Burling D., Halligan S., Roddie M.E., et al. Computed tomography colonography: automated diameter and volume measurement of colonic polyps compared with a manual technique-in vitro study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 29 (2005) 387-393
13. Barish M.A., Soto J.A., and Ferrucci J.T. Consensus on current clinical practice of virtual colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184 (2005) 786-792
14. Dehmeshki J, Halligan S, Roddie M, et al. Computer-assisted reader sofware for CT colonography: effect of polyp enhancement filters on detection rates for tagged and untagged data. Eur Radiol (in press).
15. Bland J.M., and Altman D.G. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1 (1986) 307-310
16. Ling S.H., Summers R.M., Loew M.H., et al. Computer-aided detection of polyps in a colon phantom: effect of scan orientation, polyp size, collimation, and dose. J Comput Assist Tomogr 26 (2002) 1013-1018
17. Fennerty M.B., Davidson J., Emerson S.S., et al. Are endoscopic measurements of colonic polyps reliable?. Am J Gastroenterol 88 (1993) 496-500