Computer-aided detection of colorectal polyps in CT colonography with and without fecal tagging: A stand-alone evaluation

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 99-108

  Mang, Thomas ^a   Bogoni, Luca ^b   Salganicoff, Marcos ^b   Wolf, Matthias ^b   Raykar, Vikas ^b   MacAri, Michael ^c   Pickhardt, Perry J ^d   Iafrate, Franco ^e   Laghi, Andrea ^e   Weber, Michael ^a   Baker, Mark E ^f   Ringl, Helmut ^a   Herold, Christian J ^a   Graser, Anno ^g  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^b SIEMENS CORPORATE RESEARCH   (United States)

^c NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

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

^e SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^f LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^g LUDWIG MAXIMILIANS UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

colorectal cancer; colorectal polyps; computer aided detection; CT colonography; virtual colonoscopy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASIA; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COLON POLYP; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL POLYP; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOGRAPHY; EUROPE; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FECES ANALYSIS; FECES TAGGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECTUM POLYP; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TUMOR VOLUME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84855843787     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31822b41e1     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Halligan S, Mallett S, Altman DG, et al. Incremental benefit of computeraided detection when used as a second and concurrent reader of CT colonographic data: multiobserver study. Radiology. 2011;258:469-476.
2. Dachman AH, Obuchowski NA, Hoffmeister JW, et al. Effect of computeraided detection for CT colonography in a multireader, multicase trial. Radiology. 2010;256:827-835.
3. Mang T, Peloschek P, Plank C, et al. Effect of computer-aided detection as a second reader in multidetector-row CT colonography. Eur Radiol. 2007;17: 2598-2607.
4. Petrick N, Haider M, Summers RM, et al. CT colonography with computeraided detection as a second reader: observer performance study. Radiology. 2008;246:148-156. (Pubitemid 350305038)
5. Lee MW, Kim SH, Park HS, et al. An anthropomorphic phantom study of computer-aided detection performance for polyp detection on CT colonography: a comparison of commercially and academically available systems. Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:445-454.
6. Hein PA, Krug LD, Romano VC, et al. Computer-aided detection in computed tomography colonography with full fecal tagging: comparison of standalone performance of 3 automated polyp detection systems. Can Assoc Radiol J. 61:102-108.
7. American College of Radiology. ACR practice guideline for the performance of computed tomography (CT) colonography in adults. http://www.acr.org/ SecondaryMainMenuCategories/quality-safety/guidelines/ct.aspx. Accessed September 30, 2010.
8. Burling D. CT colonography standards. Clin Radiol. 2010;65:474-480.
9. Nappi JJ, Nagata K, Cai W, et al. Pictorial review of false-negative studies in computer-assisted CT colonography abstract. Presented at the: Radiological Society of North America Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting. Chicago, Illinois: Radiological Society of North America; 2009:866.
10. 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. (Pubitemid 37485135)
11. Graser A, Stieber P, Nagel D, et al. Comparison of CT colonography, colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy and faecal occult blood tests for the detection of advanced adenoma in an average risk population. Gut. 2009;58:241-248.
12. Virtual Colonoscopy Training Collection from the Virtual Colonoscopy Center, Walter Reed Army Medical Center and Naval Medical Center San Diego. Available at: https://wiki.nci.nih.gov/display/CIP/Virtual-Colonoscopy.
13. Taylor SA, Laghi A, Lefere P, et al. European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR): consensus statement on CT colonography. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:575-579. (Pubitemid 46140331)
14. Macari M, Bini EJ, Jacobs SL, et al. Filling defects at CT colonography: pseudo-and diminutive lesions (the good), polyps (the bad), flat lesions, masses, and carcinomas (the ugly). Radiographics. 2003;23:1073-1091. (Pubitemid 37414723)
15. Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, et al. CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal. Radiology. 2005;236:3-9. (Pubitemid 40853289)
16. Fidler J, Johnson C. Flat polyps of the colon: accuracy of detection by CT colonography and histologic significance. Abdom Imaging. 2009;34:157-171.
17. Pickhardt PJ, Nugent PA, Choi JR, et al. Flat colorectal lesions in asymptomatic adults: implications for screening with CT virtual colonoscopy. Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183:1343-137.
18. Liedenbaum MH, de Vries AH, Halligan S, et al. CT colonography polyp matching: differences between experienced readers. Eur Radiol. 2009;19: 1723-1730.
19. Summers RM, Yao J, Pickhardt PJ, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy computer-aided polyp detection in a screening population. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:1832-1844. (Pubitemid 41772962)
20. Graser A, Kolligs FT, Mang T, et al. Computer-aided detection in CT colonography: initial clinical experience using a prototype system. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:2608-2615.
21. Dehmeshki J, Halligan S, Taylor SA, et al. Computer assisted detection software for CT colonography: effect of sphericity filter on performance characteristics for patients with and without fecal tagging. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:662-668.
22. Doshi T, Rusinak D, Halvorsen RA, et al. CT colonography: false-negative interpretations. Radiology. 2007;244:165-173. (Pubitemid 46981971)
23. Nappi JJ, Yoshida H. Automated scheme for preparation-independent detection of colorectal lesions with comparison to conventional CAD in CT colonography. Proceedings of MICCAI 2008 Workshop on Computational and Visualization Challenges in the New Era of Virtual Colonoscopy. New York; 2008:127-134.
24. Altman DG, Royston P. What do we mean by validating a prognostic model? Stat Med. 2000;19:453-473. (Pubitemid 30126878)
25. Wagner RF, Beiden SV, Campbell G, et al. Assessment of medical imaging and computer-assist systems: lessons from recent experience. Acad Radiol. 2002;9:1264-1277. (Pubitemid 35265398)
26. Summers RM, Handwerker LR, Pickhardt PJ, et al. Performance of a previously validated CT colonography computer-aided detection system in a new patient population. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:168-174. (Pubitemid 351955196)
27. Lawrence EM, Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, et al. Colorectal polyps: stand-alone performance of computer-aided detection in a large asymptomatic screening population. Radiology. 2010;256:791-798.
28. Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, et al. Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1207-1217.
29. Neri E, Vagli P, Picchietti S, et al. CT colonography: contrast enhancement of benign and malignant colorectal lesions versus fecal residuals. Abdom Imaging. 2005;30:694-697. (Pubitemid 41743586)
30. Summers RM, Frentz SM, Liu J, et al. Conspicuity of colorectal polyps at CT colonography: visual assessment, CAD performance, and the important role of polyp height. Acad Radiol. 2009;16:4-14.
31. Taylor SA, Iinuma G, Saito Y, et al. CT colonography: computer-aided detection of morphologically flat T1 colonic carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2008; 18:1666-1673.
32. Baker ME, Bogoni L, Obuchowski NA, et al. Computer-aided detection of colorectal polyps: can it improve sensitivity of less-experienced readers? Preliminary findings. Radiology. 2007;245:140-149. (Pubitemid 47417797)
33. Nappi JJ, Nagata K. Sources of false positives in computer-assisted CT colonography. Abdom Imaging. 2011;36:153-164.