CT colonography with limited bowel preparation: Prospective assessment of patient experience and preference in comparison to optical colonoscopy with cathartic bowel preparation

European Radiology

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 146-156

  Jensch, Sebastiaan ^a,c   Bipat, Shandra ^a   Peringa, Jan ^b   De Vries, Ayso H ^a   Heutinck, Anneke ^a   Dekker, Evelien ^a   Baak, Lubbertus C ^b   Montauban Van Swijndregt, Alexander D ^b   Stoker, Jaap ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis ^*  (Netherlands)

^c ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Bowel preparation; Colon; Contrast; CT colonography; Faecal tagging; Gastrointestinal; Patient acceptance; Side effects

Indexed keywords

BARIUM; BISACODYL; MACROGOL; MEGLUMINE DIATRIZOATE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER RISK; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIARRHEA; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL SYMPTOM; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; INTESTINE PREPARATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PAIN; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY;

CATHARTICS; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PREVALENCE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 76949090847     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1517-0     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. CD Johnson MH Chen AY Toledano, et al. 2008 Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers N Engl J Med 359 1207 1217 10.1056/NEJMoa0800996 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXhtFGjt7fI 18799557
2. DH Kim PJ Pickhardt AJ Taylor, et al. 2007 CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia N Engl J Med 357 1403 1412 10.1056/NEJMoa070543 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXhtFeisLvF 17914041 (Pubitemid 47535594)
3. RA Smith V Cokkinides OW Brawley 2009 Cancer screening in the United States, 2009: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and issues in cancer screening CA Cancer J Clin 59 27 41 10.3322/caac.20008 19147867
4. N Nelson 2008 Virtual colonoscopy accepted as primary colon cancer screening Test JNCI 100 1492 1494 18957683
5. SL Ristvedt EG McFarland LB Weinstock EP Thyssen 2003 Patient preferences for CT colonography, conventional colonoscopy, and bowel preparation Am J Gastroenterol 98 578 585 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.07302.x 12650790 (Pubitemid 36348528)
6. RE van Gelder E Birnie J Florie, et al. 2004 CT colonography and colonoscopy: assessment of patient preference in a 5-week follow-up study Radiology 233 328 337 10.1148/radiol.2331031208 15358854 (Pubitemid 39423788)
7. TJ Beebe CD Johnson SM Stoner KJ Anderson PJ Limburg 2007 Assessing attitudes toward laxative preparation in colorectal cancer screening and effects on future testing: potential receptivity to computed tomographic colonography Mayo Clin Proc 82 666 671 10.4065/82.6.666 17550745
8. MR Callstrom CD Johnson JG Fletcher, et al. 2001 CT colonography without cathartic group: feasibility study Radiology 219 693 698 1:STN:280: DC%2BD3M3ps1yrsg%3D%3D 11376256
9. P Lefere S Gryspeerdt J Marrannes, et al. 2005 CT colonography after fecal tagging with a reduced cathartic cleansing and a reduced volume of barium AJR Am J Roentgenol 184 1836 1842 15908539
10. M Thomeer I Carbone H Bosmans, et al. 2003 Stool tagging applied in thin-slice multidetector computed tomography colonography J Comput Assist Tomogr 27 132 139 10.1097/00004728-200303000-00005 12703001 (Pubitemid 37047206)
11. D Bielen M Thomeer D Vanbeckevoort, et al. 2003 Dry group for virtual CT colonography with fecal tagging using water-soluble contrast medium initial results Eur Radiol 13 453 458 12594546
12. S Jensch AH de Vries D Pot, et al. 2008 Image quality and patient acceptance of four regimens with different amounts of mild laxatives for CT colonography AJR Am J Roentgenol 191 158 167 10.2214/AJR.07.3128 18562740 (Pubitemid 351955195)
13. PA Lefere SS Gryspeerdt J Dewyspelaere, et al. 2002 Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT colonography: initial results polyp detection and patient acceptance Radiology 224 393 403 10.1148/radiol.2241011222 12147834
14. ME Zalis JJ Perumpillichira C Magee G Kohlberg PF Hahn 2006 Tagging-based, electronically cleansed CT colonography: evaluation of patient comfort and image readability Radiology 239 149 159 10.1148/radiol.2383041308 16567485
15. SA Taylor A Slater DN Burling, et al. 2008 CT colonography: optimisation, diagnostic performance and patient acceptability of reduced-laxative regimens using barium-based faecal tagging Eur Radiol 18 32 42 10.1007/s00330-007-0631-0 17404739
16. R Iannaccone A Laghi C Catalano, et al. 2004 Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic group for the detection of colorectal polyps Gastroenterology 127 300 1311 10.1053/j.gastro.2004.08.025 (Pubitemid 39457756)
17. S Jensch AH de Vries J Peringa, et al. 2008 CT colonography with limited bowel preparation: performance characteristics in an increased-risk population Radiology 247 122 132 10.1148/radiol.2471070439 18292475
18. J Florie S Jensch RA Nievelstein, et al. 2007 MR colonography with limited bowel preparation compared with optical colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer Radiology 243 122 131 10.1148/radiol. 2431052088 17329686 (Pubitemid 46579702)
19. PJ Pickhardt 2005 CT Colonography without catharsis: the ultimate study or useful additional option? Gastroenterology 128 521 522 10.1053/j.gastro.2004. 12.020 15685576 (Pubitemid 40431105)
20. GS Davis CA Santa Ana SG Morawski JS Fordtran 1980 Development of a lavage solution associated with minimal water and electrolyte absorption or secretion Gastroenterology 78 991 995 1:CAS:528:DyaL3cXksFeqs7c%3D 7380204
21. C Ell W Fischbach R Keller, et al. 2003 A randomized, blinded, prospective trial to compare the safety and efficacy of three bowel-cleansing solutions for colonoscopy Endoscopy 35 300 304 10.1055/s-2003-38150 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3s7kslWnsg%3D%3D 12664385 (Pubitemid 36388809)
22. A Bitoun T Ponchon M Barthet, et al. 2006 Results of a prospective randomised multicentre controlled trial comparing a new 2-L ascorbic acid plus polyethylene glycol and electrolyte solution vs. sodium phosphate solution in patients undergoing elective colonoscopy Aliment Pharmacol Ther 24 1631 1642 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03167.x 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXpslagsg%3D%3D 17094774 (Pubitemid 44915211)
23. CM Poon DW Lee SK Mak, et al. 2002 Two liters of polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage solution versus sodium phosphate as bowel cleansing regimen for colonoscopy: a prospective randomized controlled trial Endoscopy 34 560 563 10.1055/s-2002-33207 1:STN:280:DC%2BD38vhsVSmtg%3D%3D 12170410 (Pubitemid 34712000)
24. B Ginnerup Pedersen TE Møller Christiansen F Viborg Mortensen H Christensen S Laurberg 2002 Bowel cleansing methods prior to CT colonography Acta Radiol 43 306 311 10.1034/j.1600-0455.2002.430312.x 1:STN:280: DC%2BD38zls1CqtA%3D%3D 12100328 (Pubitemid 34729525)
25. MP Curran GL Plosker 2004 Oral sodium phosphate solution: a review of its use as a colorectal cleanser Drugs 64 1697 1714 10.2165/00003495-200464150- 00009 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXnvFWhsrk%3D 15257632 (Pubitemid 39128007)
26. HL Tan QY Liew S Loo R Hawkins 2002 Severe hyperphosphataemia and associated electrolyte and metabolic derangement following the administration of sodium phosphate for bowel preparation Anaesthesia 57 478 483 10.1046/j.0003-2409.2001.02519.x 1:STN:280:DC%2BD383ivFemsw%3D%3D 11966559 (Pubitemid 34477046)
27. C von Wagner S Halligan WS Atkin, et al. 2009 Choosing between CT colonography and colonoscopy in the diagnostic context: a qualitative study of influences on patient preferences Health Expect 12 18 26 10.1111/j.1369-7625. 2008.00520.x