Considering double contrast barium enema and its demise: A case for systematic videorecording of colonoscopy

American Journal of Gastroenterology

Volumn 103, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 3149-3151

  Rex, Douglas K ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BARIUM; CONTRAST MEDIUM; BARIUM SULFATE; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; ENEMA;

BARIUM ENEMA; CANADA; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DOCUMENTATION; DOUBLE CONTRAST BARIUM ENEMA; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; REVIEW; RISK REDUCTION; SIGMOIDOSCOPY; VIDEORECORDING; COLON DISEASE; COLON TUMOR; NOTE; RADIOGRAPHY;

BARIUM SULFATE; COLONIC DISEASES; COLONIC NEOPLASMS; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLONOSCOPY; CONTRAST MEDIA; ENEMA; HUMANS; VIDEO RECORDING;

EID: 58149395050     PISSN: 00029270     EISSN: 15720241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.02206.x     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Robertson RH, Burkhardt JH, Powell MP, et al. Trends in colon cancer screening procedures in the US Medicare and Tricare populations: 1999-2001. Prev Med 2006 42 : 460 2.
2. Klabunde CN, Jones E, Brown ML, et al. Colorectal cancer screening with double-contrast barium enema: A national survey of diagnostic radiologists. Am J Roentgenol 2002 179 : 1419 27.
3. Toma J, Paszat LF, Gunraj N, et al. Rates of new or missed colorectal cancer after barium enema and their risk factors: A population-based study. Am J Gastroenterol in press.
4. Halligan S, Marshall M, Taylor S, et al. Observer variation in the detection of colorectal neoplasia on double-contrast barium enema: Implications for colorectal cancer screening and training. Clin Radiol 2003 58 : 948 54.
5. Shorvon PJ. Commentary on: Observer variation in the detection of colorectal neoplasia on double-contrast barium enema: Implications for colorectal cancer screening and training. Clin Radiol 2003 58 : 945 7.
6. Hassan I. Observer variation in the detection of colorectal neoplasia on double-contrast barium enema: Implications for colorectal cancer screening and training. Clin Radiol 2005 60 : 133.
7. Winawer SJ, Stewart ET, Zauber AG, et al. National Polyp Study Work Group. A comparison of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium enema for surveillance after polypectomy. N Engl J Med 2000 342 : 1766 72.
8. Rex DK, Rahmani EY, Haseman JH, et al. Relative sensitivity of colonoscopy and barium enema for detection of colorectal cancer in clinical practice. Gastroenterology 1997 112 : 17 23.
9. 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 11.
10. 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 84.
11. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Burling D, et al. Intra-individual comparison of patient acceptability of multidetector-row CT colonography and double-contrast barium enema. Clin Radiol 2005 60 : 207 14.
12. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Saunders BP, et al. Acceptance by patients of multidetector CT colonography compared with barium enema examinations, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003 181 : 913 21.
13. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Slater A, et al. Comparison of radiologists' confidence in excluding significant colorectal neoplasia with multidetector-row CT colonography compared with double contrast barium enema. Br J Radiol 2006 79 : 208 15.
14. Ferrucci JT. Double-contrast barium enema: Use in practice and implications for CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006 187 : 170 3.
15. Thomas RD, Fairhurst JJ, Frost RA. Wessex regional radiology audit: Barium enema in colo-rectal carcinoma. Clin Radiol 1995 50 : 647 50.
16. Tawn DJ, Squire CJ, Mohammed MA, et al. for the Royal College of Radiologists Clinical Radiology Audit Sub-Committee. National audit of the sensitivity of double-contrast barium enema for colorectal carcinoma, using control charts. Clin Radiol 2005 60 : 558 64.
17. Strom E, Larsen JL. Colon cancer at barium enema examination and colonoscopy: A study from the county of Hordaland, Norway. Radiology 1999 211 : 211 4.
18. Rex DK. Maximizing detection of adenomas and cancers during colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterology 2006 101 : 2866 77.
19. Glick S. Double-contrast barium enema for colorectal cancer screening: A review of the issues and a comparison with other screening alternatives. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000 174 : 1529 37.
20. Kung JW, Levine MS, Glick SN, et al. Colorectal cancer: Screening double-contrast barium enema examination in average-risk adults older than 50 years. Radiology 2006 240 : 725 35.
21. Levine MS, Glick SN, Rubesin SE, et al. Double-contrast barium enema examination and colorectal cancer: A plea for radiologic screening. Radiology 2002 222 : 313 5.
22. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, et al. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 2006 355 : 2533 41.
23. Chen SC, Rex DK. Endoscopist can be more powerful than age and male gender in predicting adenoma detection at colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2007 102 : 856 61.
24. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: A joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. Gastroenterology 2008 134 : 1570 95.
25. Glick SN. Colonoscopy versus barium enema: A reappraisal of the facts and issues. Gastroenterology 1997 113 : 1048 49.
26. Rex DK. Reply to Colonoscopy versus barium enema: A reappraisal of the facts and issues. Gastroenterology 1997 113 : 1049 50.
27. Rex DK. Colonoscopy: The dominant and preferred colorectal cancer screening strategy in the United States. Mayo Clin Proc 2007 82 : 662 4.
28. Pickhardt PJ. Colonic preparation for computed tomographic colonography: Understanding the relative advantages and disadvantages of a noncathartic approach. Mayo Clin Proc 2007 82 : 659 61.
29. de Groen P, Stanek S, Tavanapong W, et al. Automated video capture for quality control during colonoscopy: Real-time recognition of "inside-the-patient" status. Am J Gastroenterol 2007 102 : S540.