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

American Journal of Gastroenterology

Volumn 99, Issue 10, 2004, Pages 1924-1935

  Hoppe, Hanno ^b   Netzer, Peter ^b   Spreng, Adrian ^b   Quattropani, Cristiana ^b   Mattich, Joerg ^b   Dinkel, Hans Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COLORECTAL TUMOR; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE PROCESSING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTESTINE POLYP; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SECOND LOOK COLONOSCOPY; SECOND LOOK SURGERY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 7044237421     PISSN: 00029270     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.40238.x     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Jemal A, Murray T, Samuels A, et al. Cancer statistics 2003. CA Can J Clin 2003;53:5-26.
2. Greenlee R, Murray T, Bolden S, et al. Cancer statistics 2000. CA Can J Clin 2000;50:7-33.
3. Netzer P, Forster C, Biral R, et al. Risk factor assessment of endoscopically removed malignant colorectal polyps. Gut 1998;43:669-74.
4. Vining DJ, Gelfand DW, Bechthold RE, et al. Technical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 162(suppl): 104.
5. Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT, et al. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997; 112:24-8.
6. Nelson D, McQuaid K, Bond J, et al. VA cooperative colonoscopy screening group. Gastrointest Endosc 1999;49:A65.
7. Hopper KD, Tunc Iyriboz A, Wise SW, et al. Mucosal detail at CT virtual reality: surface versus volume rendering. Radiology 2000;214:517-22.
8. Kara AK, Daniel Johnson C, MacCarty RL, et al. CT colonography: Single- versus multi-detector row imaging. Radiology 2001;219:461-5.
9. Lefere PA, Gryspeerdt SS, Dewyspelaere J, et al. Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT colonography: Initial results polyp detection and patient acceptance. Radiology 2002;224:393-403.
10. van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Serlie IW, et al. CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: Feasibility of dose reduction. Radiology 2002;224:25-33.
11. Morrin MM, Farrell RJ, Kruskal JB, et al. Utility of intravenously administered contrast material at CT colonography. Radiology 2000;217:765-71.
12. Dachman AH, Kuniyoshi JK, Boyle CM, et al. CT colonography with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171:989-95.
13. Beaulieu CF, Jeffrey RB, Karadi C, et al. Display modes for CT colonography. Part II. Blinded comparison of axial CT and virtual endoscopic and panoramic endoscopic volume rendered studies. Radiology 1999;212:203-12.
14. Netzer P, Büttiker U, Pfister M, et al. Frequency of advanced neoplasia in the proximal colon without an index polyp in the rectosigmoid. Dis Colon Rectum 1999;42:661-7.
15. Pineau BC, Paskett ED, Chen GJ, et al. Validation of virtual colonoscopy in the detection of colorectal polyps and masses. Int J of Gastroint Ca 2001;30:133-40.
16. Netzer P, Binek J, Hammer B, et al. Significance of histologic criteria for the management of patients with malignant colorectal polyps and polypectomy. Scand J Gastroenterol 1997;32:910-6.
17. Halpern EF, Gazelle GS. Probability in radiology. Radiology 2003;226:12-5.
18. Johnson CD, Toledano AY, Herman BA, et al. Computerized tomographic colonography: Performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting. Gastroenterology 2003;125:688-95.
19. Sosna J, Morrin MM, Kruskal JB, et al. CT colonography of colorectal polyps: A metaanalysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:1593-8.
20. Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy PC, et al. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1496-503.
21. Pickhardt PJ, Choi R, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2191-200.
22. Royster AP, Fenlon HM, Clarke PD, et al. CT colonoscopy of colorectal neoplasms: Two-dimensional and three-dimensional virtual-reality techniques with colonoscopic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;169:1237-42.
23. Summers RM, Beaulieu CF, Pusanik LM, et al. Automated polyp detector for CT colonography: Feasibility study. Radiology 2000;216:284-90.
24. Pickhardt PJ. Three-dimensional endoluminal CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): Comparison of three commercially available systems. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:1599-606.
25. Kara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE, et al. Detection of colorectal polyps with CT colonography: Initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity. Radiology 1997;205:59-65.
26. Macari M, Milano A, Lavelle M, et al. Comparison of time-efficient CT colonography with two- and three-dimensional colonic evaluation for detecting colorectal polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:1543-9.
27. Ferrucci JT. Colon cancer screening with virtual colonoscopy-promise, polyps, politics. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177:975-88.
28. Netzer P, Buttiker U, Pfister M, et al. Frequency of advanced neoplasia in the proximal colon without an index polyp in the rectosigmoid. Dis Colon Rectum 1999;42:661-7.
29. Macari M, Megibow AJ. Pitfalls of using three-dimensional CT colonography with two-dimensional imaging correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:137-43.
30. Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, et al. Colorectal neoplasia: Performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology 2001;219:685-92.
31. Pochaczevsky R. Digital subtraction bowel cleansing in CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:241.
32. Callstrom MR, Johnson CD, Fletcher JG, et al. CT colonography without cathartic preparation: Feasibility study. Radiology 2001;219:693-8.
33. Morrin MM, Kruskal JB, Farrell RJ, et al. Endoluminal CT colonography after an incomplete endoscopic colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;172:913-8.
34. Fenlon HM, McAneny DB, Nunes DP, et al. Occlusive colon carcinoma: Virtual colonoscopy in the preoperative evaluation of the proximal colon. Radiology 1999;210:423-8.
35. Neri E, Giusti P, Battolla L, et al. Colorectal cancer: Role of CT colonography in preoperative evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy. Radiology 2002;223:615-9.
36. Ginnerup Pedersen B, Rosenkilde M, Christiansen TEM, et al. Extracolonic findings at computed tomography colonography are a challenge. Gut 2003;52:1744-7.
37. Ferrucci JT. Colon cancer screening with virtual colonoscopy: Promise, polyps, politics. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177:975-88.
38. 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;224:383-92.