Quality assessment for CT colonography: Validation of automated measurement of colonic distention and residual fluid

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 189, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1457-1463

  Deshpande, Keshav K ^a   Summers, Ronald M ^a   Van Uitert, Robert L ^a   Franaszek, Marek ^a   Brown, Linda ^a   Dwyer, Andrew J ^a   Fletcher, Joel G ^b   Choi, J Richard ^c   Pickhardt, Perry J ^d  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH   (United States)

^b MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^c UNIFORMED SERVICES UNIVERSITY OF THE HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Colon; Colonography; CT; Quality; Virtual colonoscopy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTESTINE DISTENSION; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIOLOGIST; SCORING SYSTEM; VALIDITY;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; COLON; COLONIC NEOPLASMS; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; DILATATION, PATHOLOGIC; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE; SOFTWARE VALIDATION;

EID: 36448973048     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.07.2327     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. 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
2. Cotton PB, Durkalski VL, Benoit PC, et al. Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 2004; 291:1713-1719
3. Mulhall BP, Veerappan GR, Jackson JL. Meta-analysis: computed tomographic colonography. Ann Intern Med 2005; 142:635-650
4. Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97:1296-1308
5. Macari M, Lavelle M, Pedrosa I, et al. Effect of different bowel preparations on residual fluid at CT colonography. Radiology 2001; 218:274-277
6. Burling D, Taylor SA, Halligan S, et al. Automated insufflation of carbon dioxide for MDCT colonography: distension and patient experience compared with manual insufflation. AJR 2006; 186:96-103
7. Yee J, Hung RK, Akerkar GA, Wall SD. The usefulness of glucagon hydrochloride for colonic distention in CT colonography. AJR 1999; 173:169-172
8. Shinners TJ, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Jones DA, Olsen CH. Patient-controlled room air insufflation versus automated carbon dioxide delivery for CT colonography. AJR 2006; 186:1491-1496
9. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Goh V, et al. Optimizing colonic distention for multi-detector row CT colonography: effect of hyoscine butylbromide and rectal balloon catheter. Radiology 2003; 229:99-108
10. Dachman AH. Advice for optimizing colonic distention and minimizing risk of perforation during CT colonography. Radiology 2006; 239:317-321
11. Hung PW, Paik DS, Napel S, et al. Quantification of distention in CT colonography: development and validation of three computer algorithms. Radiology 2002; 222:543-554
12. Airman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London, UK: Chapman & Hall, 1991
13. Iordanescu G, Summers RM. Automated centerline for computed tomography colonography. Acad Radiol 2003; 10:1291-1301
14. Van Uitert R, Bitter I, Summers RM, Choi JR, Pickhardt PJ. Quantitative assessment of colon distention for polyp detection in CT virtual colonoscopy. In: Manduca A, Amini AA, eds. Progress in biomedical optics and imaging: proceedings of SPIE medical imaging 2006 - physiology, function, and structure from medical images, vol. 6143. Bellingham, WA: SPIE, 2006:434-443
15. 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
16. Park SH, Ha HK, Kim MJ, et al. False-negative results at multi-detector row CT colonography: multivariate analysis of causes for missed lesions. Radiology 2005; 235:495-502
17. Morrin MM, Farrell RJ, Kruskal JB, Reynolds K, McGee JB, Raptopoulos V. Utility of intravenously administered contrast material at CT colonography. Radiology 2000; 217:765-771
18. Gryspeerdt SS, Herman MJ, Baekelandt MA, van Holsbeeck BG, Lefere PA. Supine/left decubitus scanning: a valuable alternative to supine/prone scanning in CT colonography. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:768-777