Polyp measurement reliability, accuracy, and discrepancy: Optical colonoscopy versus CT colonography with pig colonic specimens

Radiology

Volumn 244, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 157-164

  Seong, Ho Park ^a   Choi, Eugene K ^a,d   Seung, Soo Lee ^a   Byeon, Jeong Sik ^a   Jo, Ji Yun ^a   Young, Hoon Kim ^b   Kyoung, Ho Lee ^b   Hyun, Kwon Ha ^a   Joon, Koo Han ^c  

^a University of Ulsan College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^b Seoul National University Bundang Hospital   (South Korea)

^c Seoul National University Hospital   (South Korea)

^d WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; COLON BIOPSY; COLON POLYP; COLONOSCOPY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FORCEPS; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MEASUREMENT ERROR; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIOLOGIST; RELIABILITY; SIMULATION; SWINE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ANIMALS; BIOPSY; COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLONOSCOPY; OPTICS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS; SWINE;

EID: 34250846551     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2441060794     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Dachman AH, Zalis ME. Quality and consistency in CT colonography and research reporting. Radiology 2004;230:319-323.
2. Ferrucci JT. Colon cancer screening with virtual colonoscopy: promise, polyps, politics. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177:975-988.
3. Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, et al. CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal. Radiology 2005;236:3-9.
4. Pickhardt PJ, Lee AD, McFarland EG, Taylor AJ. Linear polyp measurement at CT colonography: in vitro and in vivo comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional displays. Radiology 2005;236:872-878.
5. Gopalswamy N, Shenoy VN, Choudhry U, et al. Is in vivo measurement of size of polyps during colonoscopy accurate? Gastrointest Endosc 1997;46:497-502.
6. Schoen RE, Gerber LD, Margulies C. The pathologic measurement of polyp size is preferable to the endoscopic estimate. Gastrointest Endosc 1997;46:492-496.
7. Morales TG, Sampliner RE, Garewal HS, Fennerty MB, Aickin M. The difference in colon polyp size before and after removal. Gastrointest Endosc 1996;43:25-28.
8. Schwartz E, Catalano MF, Krevsky B. Endoscopic estimation of size: improved accuracy by directed teaching. Gastrointest Endosc 1995;42:292-295.
9. Margulies C, Krevsky B, Catalano MF. How accurate are endoscopic estimates of size? Gastrointest Endosc 1994;40:174-177.
10. Fennerty MB, Davidson J, Emerson SS, Sampliner RE, Hixson LJ, Garewal HS. Are endoscopic measurements of colonic polyps reliable? Am J Gastroenterol 1993;88:496-500.
11. Vakil N. Measurement of lesions by endoscopy: an overview. Endoscopy 1995;27:694-697.
12. Halligan S, Altman DC, Taylor SA, et al. CT colonography in the detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: systematic review, meta-analysis, and proposed minimum data set for study level reporting. Radiology 2005;237:893-904.
13. Halligan S, Park SH, Ha HK. Causes of false-negative findings at CT colonography. Radiology 2006;238:1075-1077.
14. 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.
15. Pineau BC, Paskett ED, Chen GJ, Durkalski VL, Espeland MA, Vining DJ. Validation of virtual colonoscopy in the detection of colorectal polyps and masses: rationale for proper study design. Int J Gastrointest. Cancer 2001;30:133-140.
16. Dachrnan AH, Lieberman J, Osnis RB, et al. Small simulated polyps in pig colon: sensitivity of CT virtual colography. Radiology 1997;203:427-430.
17. Juchems MS, Fleiter TR, Pauls S, Schmidt SA, Brambs HJ, Aschoff AJ. CT colonography: comparison of a colon dissection display versus 3D endoluminal view for the detection of polyps. Eur Radiol 2006;16:68-72.
18. Johnson KT, Johnson CD, Fletcher JG, MacCarty RL, Summers RL. CT colonography using 360-degree virtual dissection: a feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:90-95.
19. Cotton PB, Durkalski VL, Pineau BC, et al. Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 2004;291:1713-1719.
20. Hoppe H, Netzer P, Spreng A, Quattropani C, Mattich J, Dinkel HP. Prospective comparison of contrast enhanced CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasms in a single institutional study using second-look colonoscopy with discrepant results. Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99:1924-1935.
21. Pineau BC, Paskett ED, Chen GJ, et al. Virtual colonoscopy using oral contrast compared with colonoscopy for the detection of patients with colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2003;125:304-310.
22. Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, Steinauer-Gebauer AM, Wall SD, McQuaid KR. Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology 2001;219:685-692.
23. 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.
24. 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.
25. Pescatore P, Glucker T, Delarive J, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement of CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). Gut 2000;47:126-130.
26. Rockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwiecki D, et al. Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet 2005;365:305-311.
27. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Saunders BP, et al. Use of multidetector-row CT colonography for detection of colorectal neoplasia in patients referred via the Department of Health "2-Week-wait" initiative. Clin Radiol 2003;58:855-861.