PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A K Hara

Publications and source records attributed to A K Hara.

15 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

CT colonography: single- versus multi-detector row imaging.

PURPOSE: To compare respiratory artifacts, colonic distention, and polyp detection at computed tomographic (CT) colonography by using single- and multi-detector row helical CT systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 237 consecutive patients received subcutaneously administered glucagon and underwent prone and supine CT colonography with single-detector row CT (n = 77) and multi-detector row CT (n = 160), followed by colonoscopy. Examination results were graded for colonic distention, respiratory artifacts, and polyp depiction by two radiologists working independently. RESULTS: Suboptimal colonic distention was significantly more common with single-detector row CT and was present in at least one segment in 52% (40 of 77 patients) of examinations versus only 19% (30 of 160 patients) with multi-detector row CT (P <.001). Mild respiratory artifacts were present in 61% (47 of 77 patients) of single-detector row CT examinations versus only 16% (26 of 160 patients) of multi-detector row CT examinations (P <.001). Depiction of polyps larger than 10 mm was 89% (eight of nine polyps) for single-detector row CT and 80% (eight of 10 polyps) for multi-detector row CT (P >.05). CONCLUSION: CT colonography performed with multi-detector row CT significantly improved the demonstration of colonic distention and depicted fewer respiratory artifacts compared with single-detector row CT. No significant differences in the depiction of polyps larger than 10 mm were demonstrated between single- and multi-detector row CT for a small number of polyps. Studies with a larger prevalence of clinically important polyps are needed for further evaluation of differences in polyp detection.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Incidental extracolonic findings at CT colonography.

PURPOSE: To determine the frequency of extracolonic findings at computed tomographic (CT) colonography and the effect of these findings on subsequent patient treatment and cost. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Conventional transverse CT colonographic scans in 264 consecutive patients were evaluated independently by two radiologists. Extracolonic findings were classified as having high, moderate, or low clinical importance. The effect of CT findings on patient treatment was assessed with chart review. The cost of additional examinations was calculated by using 1999 Medicare reimbursements. RESULTS: Thirty (11%) patients had highly important extracolonic findings, which resulted in further examinations in 18 (7%) patients, including ultrasonography in 10, CT in 13, and intravenous pyelography in one. Six patients underwent surgery because of incidentally discovered CT colonographic findings. Two patients with findings of moderate or low importance underwent additional imaging. A total of $7,324 was required for work-up for extracolonic findings (mean of an additional $28 per examination). Three extracolonic malignancies were overlooked at CT colonography. CONCLUSION: Additional work-up of extracolonic CT colonographic findings was relatively infrequent but was often worthwhile when performed for lesions classified as highly important. The evaluation of extracolonic structures at CT colonography has definite limitations with regard to solid organs but can help detect serious disease without substantially increasing the cost per patient.

Abdomen↗
PubMed1997

Computed tomographic colonography (Virtual colonoscopy): a new method for detecting colorectal neoplasms.

Computed tomographic (CT) colonography is an exciting new technique that uses volumetric CT data combined with advanced imaging software to create two-dimensional and three-dimensional images of the colon. The technique uses both three-dimensional images that simulate the endoluminal perspective of the colonoscope, as well as axial and reformatted two-dimensional images. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional images are complementary, and in combination offer the most robust performance for the detection of colorectal polyps. Currently, CT colonographic examinations are performed in the fully cleansed and air-inflated colon using a slice thickness of 5 mm, a reconstruction interval of 3 mm, a pitch of 1.3, and 70 mA. In a blinded, prospective study of 70 patients (half with a known lesion, and half from a surveillance population with a low disease prevalence) the sensitivity for the detection of polyps of 1 cm or more is 75%, and the specificity is 90%. The most commonly encountered problems include retained colonic fluid and stool, suboptimally distended colonic segments, and long interpretation times. Many of these problems can be solved using both supine and prone imaging. It is expected that the performance of this examination will improve, and that a new era of colorectal screening will begin.

Colonoscopy↗
PubMed1997

Detection of colorectal polyps with CT colography: initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity.

PURPOSE: To estimate the sensitivity and specificity of computed tomographic (CT) colography in detection of colorectal polyps and to compare these findings with those at axial CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 70 consecutive patients, CT colography and colonoscopy were performed. Helical axial CT images and CT colographic images (multiplanar two- and three-dimensional endoluminal images) were evaluated separately by two radiologists blinded to results from colonoscopy and other imaging studies. Findings were compared with those at colonoscopy, which was the standard. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity for the two observers with CT colography averaged 75% and 90% in patients with adenomas 10 mm in diameter or larger, 66% and 63% in patients with adenomas 5 mm in diameter or greater, and 45% and 80% for patients with adenomas less than 5 mm in diameter, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity with axial CT were lower than those with CT colography (58% and 74%, respectively) in patients with adenomas 10 mm in diameter or larger. CONCLUSION: Compared with axial CT, CT colography appears to have superior sensitivity and specificity in detection of clinically important colorectal adenomas. Early performance of CT colography seems promising for detection of colorectal polyps 5 mm and larger.

Adenoma↗
PubMed1997

Computed tomographic colography and virtual colonoscopy.

CT colography (CTC) is a powerful new approach to imaging the colorectum and a promising screening tool for the detection of colorectal neoplasia. From data generated by a helical CT scan, CTC uses virtual reality technology to produce highly discriminant two- and three-dimensional images that permit a thorough and minimally invasive evaluation of the entire colorectum. A dynamic CTC display technique from the endoluminal perspective, called cf2virtual colonoscopy,cf1 simulates colonoscopy by "flying" through the three-dimensional colon image. CTC offers potential advantages in diagnostic performance, safety, and patient acceptance over current screening approaches. Although early data suggest excellent colorectal polyp detection rates, this nascent technology will require rigorous clinical investigation and further refinements to assess adequately its place in the endoscopist's armamentarium.

Barium Sulfate↗
PubMed1996

Detection of colorectal polyps by computed tomographic colography: feasibility of a novel technique.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Computed tomographic colography (CTC) represents a novel technique for colorectal polyp detection. A prospective study was undertaken to determine the optimal CTC scanning parameters based on an artificial colon model and to assess the feasibility of CTC to detect clinically significant colorectal polyps. METHODS: A colon model was scanned by helical computed tomography at multiple parameters. Reformatted two-dimensional and three-dimensional images were then graded for polyp detection and image quality. Subsequently, 10 patients with known colon polyps underwent CTC immediately before colonoscopy. The number of polyps detected by two radiologists using CTC were compared with colonoscopy results that served as the gold standard. RESULTS: The optimal scanning parameters in the colon model were 5-mm collimation, 5 mm/s table speed, and 1-mm reconstruction interval. Ten patients had 30 polyps (range, 0.2-2.0 cm) by colonscopy, and all polyps > or = 0.5 cm were adenomas. Polyp detection by CTC for both observers was 100% (5 of 5) > or = 1 cm, 71% (5 of 7) between 0.5 and 0.9 cm, and 11%-28% (2-5 of 18) < 0.5 cm. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this small, unblinded pilot study, CTC is feasible for colorectal polyp detection > or = 0.5 cm in diameter.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

Colorectal polyp detection with CT colography: two- versus three-dimensional techniques. Work in progress.

PURPOSE: To compare detection of colorectal polyps with two-dimensional (2D) computed tomographic (CT) colography only, three-dimensional (3D) CT colography only, and a combination of 2D and 3D CT colography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 11 computer-simulated polyps (1-10 mm) were placed randomly in five identical CT data sets for images of a 72-year-old man's polyp-free, rectosigmoid colon. Fifteen CT colographic data sets were produced: five with 2D CT images only, five with 3D CT images only, and five with 2D and 3D CT images. Two radiologists randomly, blindly, and independently evaluated all 15 data sets to detect the simulated polyps. RESULTS: No polyps 2 mm or smaller were detected. No statistically significant differences in the detection of colorectal polyps were found between the three techniques. However, the combination of 2D and 3D CT colography resulted in polyp detection rates that were greater than or equal to those of 2D or 3D CT colography alone. Flat polyps were more difficult to detect than sessile polyps. Five false-positive findings occurred with 2D CT colography. CONCLUSION: A combined display of 2D and 3D CT images likely provides the greatest rate of detection of colorectal polyps.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

Variability of consecutive in vivo MR flow measurements in the main portal vein.

OBJECTIVE: The variability of consecutive cine phase-contrast MR flow measurements could significantly affect their use for clinical decisions, especially during provocative testing. The purposes of this study were to determine the normal variability of flow and consecutive flow measurements in the main portal vein on MR images and to determine how intraobserver variability, interobserver variability, and MR imager variability affect these measurements. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: MR flow measurements were acquired four consecutive times at the same location in the main portal vein of 12 subjects and three consecutive times at the same location in a nonpulsatile vessel model. All acquisitions were completed within 10 min. All main portal vein MR data sets were evaluated manually in a blinded review by two independent observers during three separate sessions spaced a mean of 4.5 weeks apart. Flow model data sets were evaluated during a single session by one observer. Variabilities were subsequently calculated by a components-of-variance analysis and by the coefficient of variation (SD/mean x 100). RESULTS: Of the total variance, 90% was due to flow variability among subjects (intersubject), 6% to flow variability within one subject (intrasubject), 2% to intraobserver variability, and 2% to interobserver variability. The coefficient of variation of consecutive MR portal vein flow measurements within a single subject was 11% +/- 5% (range, 3-23%). Intra- and interobserver variabilities were 5% +/- 2% (range, 1-11%) and 4% +/- 4% (range, 0-17%), respectively. MR imager variability was 1% +/- 1% (range, 0-2%). CONCLUSION: The mean variability of consecutive cine phase-contrast MR flow measurements in the main portal vein is 11% +/- 5% and could affect research and clinical protocols that employ this technique.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Abdominal phase-contrast MR angiography: breath-hold versus non-breath-hold techniques.

Breath-hold magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is now replacing many non-breath-hold pulse sequences in the upper abdomen because of faster imaging times and improved image quality. The authors compared non-breath-hold cine phase-contrast (PC) and breath-hold 2D phase-contrast (2DPC) magnetic resonance (MR) angiograms of the main portal vein (MPV) and superior mesenteric artery (SMA) in 12 volunteers. All angiograms were graded in overall image quality, vessel conspicuity, and signal-to-noise ratios (SNR). In the MPV MR angiograms, the breath-hold 2DPC sequence produced better images than the non-breath-hold cine PC sequence as graded by overall image quality (P = .016) and SNR (P = .004). Conversely, in the SMA MR angiograms, the non-breath-hold cine PC sequence produced better images than the breath-hold sequence in terms of overall image quality (P = .008) and SNR (P = .008). By reducing the most significant cause of image artifacts, (ie, using a breath-hold 2DPC sequence to decrease respiratory misregistration of the MPV, and using a cardiac-gated cine PC sequence to minimize pulsatile artifacts of the SMA), one can clearly optimize the quality of MR angiography.

Abdomen↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Detection of flat lesions in the colon with CT colonography.

BACKGROUND: We investigated whether flat lesions of the colon could be detected on computed tomographic colonography (CTC). METHODS: CTC and conventional colonoscopy were performed on 547 consecutive patients. A subset of 22 polyps was described as flat on colonoscopy (n = 16) or CTC (n = 6) and are the basis of this report. CTC was performed with a standard technique (5-mm collimation, 3-mm reconstruction intervals). Patients were scanned in supine and prone positions. Examinations were randomly assigned and reviewed in a blinded fashion by two of three radiologists. Prospective interpretations were recorded. All patients had conventional colonoscopy, which served as the gold standard. RESULTS: Twenty-two flat lesions ranging from 0.4 to 3.5 cm were histologically classified as adenomatous (n = 8) or hyperplastic (n = 14). The sensitivities for detecting all flat lesions and flat adenomas by each reviewer were 43% and 100%, 65% and 100%, and 15% and 13%, respectively. "Double reading" resulted in detection of 68% of all lesions and 100% of adenomas. Of the seven hyperplastic polyps missed by both reviewers, four were identified retrospectively. CONCLUSION: Flat lesions of the colon represent an important source of false negative CTC examinations. Awareness of their morphology can assist radiologists in finding most of these challenging lesions.

Adenomatous Polyps↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Colorectal lesions: evaluation with CT colography.

Computed tomographic (CT) colography is a promising technique for differentiating malignant or premalignant colorectal disease from benign lesions. In this technique, helical CT data are used to produce reformated two-dimensional (2D) CT images and simulated endoscopic images of the colon. Adenomatous polyps 0.7 cm in diameter or larger are easily detected on CT colographic images: A pedunculated polyp is identified by means of its stalk, whereas a sessile polyp appears as a polypoid soft-tissue mass projecting into the air-filled lumen of the colon. However, flat adenomas (lesions raised less than 2 mm from the surface of the colon) are difficult to detect with CT colography. In cases of colorectal cancer, both intraluminal and extraluminal disease can be evaluated with CT colography. Although CT colography does not allow differentiation between hyperplastic and adenomatous polyps, lipomas can be confidently diagnosed because of their fatty attenuation on reformatted 2D images. Pseudolesions that can produce false-positive findings at CT colography include the ileocecal valve, retained stool, retained barium, respiratory artifacts, and a stool-filled diverticulum.

Adenomatous Polyps↗