Colonic perforation at CT colonography in a patient without known colonic disease.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Aged↗
Biomedical subjects
Robert L MacCarty
Publications and source records attributed to Robert L MacCarty.
CT colonography using 360-degree virtual dissection: a feasibility study.
OBJECTIVE: Using a 3D rendering technique called "virtual dissection," we sought to evaluate polyp and fold distortion using a colon phantom, estimate the polyp detection performance in humans, and estimate the added benefit of double interpretation and computer-aided diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A colon phantom containing 144 polyps of varying sizes (5-12 mm) and shapes (flat, sessile, pedunculated) was scanned. Polyp shape and distortion at virtual dissection were categorized as flame, club, pea, or bizarre. Haustral fold distortion was graded. The CT colonography examinations in 20 consecutive patients (colonoscopically proven normal findings, n = 5; polyps > or = 1 cm, n = 17 in 15 patients) were blindly reviewed by three radiologists using the virtual dissection technique. The added benefits of double interpretation and computer-aided diagnosis were tabulated. RESULTS: Sessile polyps appeared flame (35/48 [73%]) or pea (11/48 [23%]) in shape. Flat polyps appeared flame-shaped (31/47 [66%]) or pea-shaped (16/47 [34%]). Pedunculated polyps were flame (15/45 [33%]), club (20/45 [44%]), or pea (6/45 [13%]) in shape. Axial distortion occurred along the longitudinal axis. The sensitivities of the three observers for polyps of 1 cm or more were 16/17 (94%), 14/17 (82%), and 15/17 (88%). The specificities were 5/5 (100%), 5/5 (100%), and 4/5 (80%). Sensitivities after double interpretation and computer-aided diagnosis improved but did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Although distortion of colonic structures exists at virtual dissection, it does so in recognizable patterns, so that sensitivity for polyp detection is not compromised.
Aged↗
Occult colorectal polyps on CT colonography: implications for surveillance.
OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to determine the prevalence of polyps that are invisible on CT colonography (CTC) in a population previously screened for colorectal neoplasms. Differences in the prevalence of occult polyps in various populations might help explain the discordant reported sensitivities for polyp detection in published reports of CTC. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five consecutive patients who had been previously screened for polyps underwent same-day colonoscopy and CTC. Many of the patients had personal histories of previous polypectomies and were undergoing surveillance colonoscopy. The scans were interpreted prospectively by an experienced radiologist. Polyps missed prospectively on CTC were analyzed retrospectively by three experienced radiologists and categorized as perception errors (visible in retrospect), technical errors (e.g., obscured by feces or fluid), or occult (invisible). RESULTS: Thirty polyps 5 mm or larger were found at colonoscopy, 18 of which were missed prospectively on CTC. Of the 18 missed polyps, 12 could not be identified in retrospect, even though they were located in clean, dry, well-distended colonic segments. These were classified as occult. Ten of the 12 occult polyps showed flat morphology on review of colonoscopy video recordings. Of the remaining six missed polyps, two were classified as perception errors, two as technical errors, and two as a combination of technical and perception error. CONCLUSION: In this population, colonographically occult polyps were common and accounted for more detection failures than perception errors and technical errors combined. The high prevalence of occult polyps may be explained by the fact that previous screening may have led to removal of easy-to-see polyps, creating a study population with a higher percentage of hard-to-see polyps.
Aged↗
Comparison of the relative sensitivity of CT colonography and double-contrast barium enema for screen detection of colorectal polyps.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: In a population reflective of a screening setting, our aim was to compare the relative sensitivity and specificity of computed tomography (CT) colonography with double-contrast barium enema (DCBE) for detection of colorectal polyps and to assess the added value of double reading at CT colonography, using endoscopy as the arbiter. METHODS: This prospective, blinded study comprised 837 asymptomatic persons at higher than average risk for colorectal cancer who underwent CT colonography followed by same-day DCBE. Examinations with polyps > or =5 mm in diameter were referred to colonoscopy. RESULTS: CT colonography readers detected 56%-79% of polyps > or =10 mm in diameter. In comparison, the sensitivity at DCBE varied between 39% and 56% for the 31 polyps > or =1 cm. All of the readers detected more polyps at CT colonography than DCBE, but the difference was statistically significant for only a single reader (P = 0.02). Relative specificity for polyps > or =10 mm on a per-patient basis ranged from 96% to 99% at CT colonography, and 99%-100% at DCBE. Doubly read CT colonography detected significantly more polyps than DCBE (81% vs. 45% for polyps > or =1 cm [P = <0.01], and 72% vs. 44% for polyps 5-9 mm [P < or = 0.01]). CONCLUSIONS: Double-read CT colonography is significantly more sensitive in detecting polyps than single-read double contrast barium enema. DCBE was significantly more specific than CT colonography.
Aged↗
Characterization of lesions missed on interpretation of CT colonography using a 2D search method.
OBJECTIVE: We examined potential factors that may cause false-negative results on CT colonography examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective and retrospective study, 500 asymptomatic patients at high risk for colorectal cancer underwent CT colonography and colonoscopy. Each CT data set was interpreted by two independent observers, who were unaware of endoscopic findings, using a method of searching through enlarged axial images to detect intraluminal lesions. Another observer identified and characterized lesions missed at prospective interpretation. Polyps were assessed for size, method of visualization, intrinsic and extrinsic features, and examination quality. RESULTS: We found 116 polyps at least 5 mm in diameter, 54 (47%) of which were missed by at least one of the prospective observers. Polyps seen in only one position were missed more often than polyps seen in both supine and prone positions (84% vs 50%, p < 0.01). Polyps located in suboptimally prepared colonic segments or along a thickened colonic wall were more frequently missed (p = 0.02 and p = 0.05, respectively). Endoscopic morphology and irregular surface contour were associated with missed lesions of all sizes (p = 0.03 and p = 0.04, respectively). Rounded intraluminal lesions were detected more often than other morphologies on CT (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Factors that influence the likelihood that a polyp may be missed at interpretation of CT colonography include being seen only in one position, having flat endoscopic or CT morphology, having surface irregularity, and being located in a poorly prepared segment or along a thickened colonic wall. Understanding these features should lead to improved polyp detection on CT colonography.
Aged↗
Pirfenidone in the treatment of primary sclerosing cholangitis.
Our aim was to evaluate the safety and assess the efficacy of pirfenidone, an antifibrotic drug, in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). Twenty-four patients with PSC were enrolled in this pilot study. Oral pirfenidone, 2400 mg daily, was given for one year. Liver biochemistries were determined at three-month intervals. The Mayo risk score was calculated, and liver biopsy and endoscopic cholangiography were performed at entry and at one year of treatment. No significant changes in liver biochemistries were noted at the end of the treatment period or at any of the three-month intervals. The Mayo risk score did not change significantly, and no significant changes were noted in the degree of inflammation, fibrosis, histologic stage of disease, or cholangiographic findings at the end of the treatment period. Adverse events occurred in 20/24 (83%) patients, but disappeared shortly after pirfenidone was discontinued. Pirfenidone did not benefit patients with PSC, and it was frequently associated with adverse events. The results of this pilot study discourage further trials of pirfenidone in patients with PSC.
Administration, Oral↗