Cost-effectiveness of computed tomographic colonography: A prospective comparison with colonoscopy

Acta Radiologica

Volumn 48, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 259-266

  Arnesen, R B ^a   Ginnerup Pedersen, B ^a   Poulsen, P B ^a   Von Benzon, E ^a   Adamsen, S ^a   Laurberg, S ^a   Hart Hansen, O ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Adults; Colonic polyps; Colonoscopy; Colorectal cancer; Comparative studies; Computed tomographic colonography; Cost effectiveness; Endoscopy; GI

Indexed keywords

COST EFFECTIVENESS; DATA REDUCTION; ENDOSCOPY; HOSPITALS; PATIENT TREATMENT; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY;

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLON POLYP; COLONOSCOPY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIOGRAPHY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLONOSCOPY; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 34247117030     PISSN: 02841851     EISSN: 16000455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02841850601182139     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Arnesen RB, Adamsen S, Svendsen LB, Raaschou HO, von Benzon E, Hansen OH. Missed lesions and falsepositive findings on computed-tomographic colonography: a controlled prospective analysis. Endoscopy 2005;37:937-44.
2. Arnesen RB, von Benzon E, Hansen OH, Svendsen LB, Raaschou HO, Adamsen S. Diagnostic performance of CT colonography and colonoscopy: a prospective and validated analysis of 231 paired examinations. Acta Radiol. (in press).
3. Bensen S, Mott LA, Dain B, Rothstein R. The colonoscopic miss rate and true one-year recurrence of colorectal neoplastic polyps. Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94:194-9.
4. Briggs AH, Gray AM. Handling uncertainty when performing economic evaluation of healthcare interventions. Health Technol Assess 1999;3:1-134.
5. Burling D, Halligan S, Slater A, Noakes MJ, Taylor SA. Potentially serious adverse events at CT colonography in symptomatic patients: national survey of the United Kingdom. Radiology 2006;239:464-71.
6. Drummond MF, OBrien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications, Oxford University Press; 1997.
7. Durkalski VL, Pineau BC, Palesch YY, Mauldin PD, Hoffman B, Vining DJ. Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy). A multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 2004;291:1713-8.
8. Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy PC III, Barish MA, Clarke PD, Ferrucci JT. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1496-503.
9. Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Welch TJ, MacCarty RL, Ahlquist DA, Reed JE, et al. Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients. Radiology 2000;216:704-11.
10. Ginnerup Pedersen B, Rosenkilde M, Christiansen TE, Laurberg S. Extracolonic findings at computed tomographic colonography. Gut 2003;52:1744-7.
11. Ginnerup Pedersen B, Christiansen TE, Bjerregaard NC, Ljungmann K, Laurberg S. Colonoscopy and multidetector-array computed-tomographic colonography: detection rates and feasibility. Endoscopy 2003;35:736-42.
12. Goldberg SN, Blachar A, Amitai M, Barmeir E, Peled N, Goldberg SN, et al. Colonic perforation at CT colonography: assessment of risk in a multicenter large cohort. Radiology 2006;239:457-63.
13. Hara AK, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ, McCollough CH, Harmsen WS. CT colonography: single- versus multi-detector row imaging. Radiology 2001;219:461-5.
14. Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE, Ahlquist DA, Nelson H, MacCarty RL, et al. Detection of colorectal polyps with CT colonography: initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity. Radiology 1997;205:59-65.
15. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, Brink JA, Mangiapane F, Trenna S, et al. Detection of colorectal lesions: lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 2003;229:775-81.
16. Isenberg GA, Ginsberg GG, Barkun AN, Bosco JJ, Nguyen CC, Petersen BT, et al. Technology status evaluation report. Virtual colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2003;57:451-4.
17. Jentschura D, Raute M, Winter J, Henkel T, Kraus M, Manegold BC. Complications in endoscopy of the lower gastrointestinal tract. Therapy and prognosis. Surg Endosc 1994;8:672-6.
18. Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, Wilson LA, Maccarty RL, Wlech TJ, list DM, et al. Prospective blinded evaluation of CT colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2003;125:311-9.
19. Macari M, Bini EJ, Jacobs SL, Naik S, Lui YW, Milano A, et al. Colorectal polyps and cancers in asymptomatic average-risk patients: evaluation with CT colonography. Radiology 2004;230:629-36.
20. McGrath JS, Ponich TP, Gregor JC. Screening for colorectal cancer: the cost to find an advanced adenoma. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:2902-7.
21. Mendeleson RM, Foster NM, Edwards JT, Wood CJ, Rosenberg MS, Forbes GM. Virtual colonoscopy compared with conventional colonoscopy: a developing technology. Med J Austr 2000;173:472-5.
22. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, Butler JA, Puckett MD, Hildebrandt HA, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2191-200.
23. Pineau BC, Paskett ED, Chen GJ, Espeland MA, Phillips K, Han JP, et al. Virtual colonoscopy using oral contrast compared with colonoscopy for the detection of patients with colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2003;125:304-10.
24. Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT, Rahmani EY, Clark DW, Helper GA, et al. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997;112:292-4.
25. Rex DK, Vining DJ, Kopecky KK. An initial experience with screening for colon polyps using spiral CT with and without CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). Gastrointest Endosc 1999;50:309-13.
26. Rockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwiecki D, Davis W, Bosworth HB, Sanders L, et al. Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet 2005;365:305-11.
27. Sonnenberg A, Delcò F, Bauerfeind P. Is virtual colonoscopy a cost-effective option to screen for colorectal cancer? Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94:2268-74.
28. Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR. Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Med Decis Making 1993;13:332-8.
29. Spinzi G, Belloni G, Martegani A, Sangiovanni A, Del Favero C, Minoli G. Computed tomographic colonography and conventional colonoscopy for colon diseases: a prospective, blinded study. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:394-400.
30. Vining DJ. Technical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality. Am J Roentgenol 1994;162:104.
31. Winawer SJ, Stewart ET, Zauber AG, Bond JH, Ansel H, Waye JD, 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;342:1766-72.
32. Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, Steinauer-Gebauer AM, Wall SD, McQuaid K.R. Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology 2001;219:685-92.