PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Colonography, Computed Tomographic”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Computed tomographic colonography.

Computed tomographic colonography, also called virtual colonoscopy, is an evolving technology under evaluation as a new method of screening for colorectal cancer. However, its performance as a test has varied widely across studies, and the reasons for these discrepancies are poorly defined. We provide an overview of some potential causes and discuss the available, often indirect, evidence. In addition, several other obstacles that may influence implementation are discussed. Future investigations should demonstrate the influence of these potential factors on sensitivity of computed tomographic colonography. Despite a growing body of evidence, it remains uncertain to what extent patient acceptance, radiation issues, flat lesions, and extracolonic findings will be a stumbling block to using computed tomographic colonography for colorectal cancer screening.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Colon imaging: computed tomographic colonography.

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC, virtual colonoscopy) is an attractive modality with which to image the colon. Many different techniques are available; moreover, during the last several years, advances in hardware and software have been remarkable. Evidence to this date suggests that CTC has varying sensitivity for detection of large colonic lesions, largely dependent on technique and the method of study. A variety of issues related to CTC are reviewed, including evolution of CTC, sensitivity and specificity of CTC, patient experience, extracolonic lesions, advances in colon preparation, and training. It is clear that CTC has great promise, but also that many questions about its use remain to be answered.

Colonic Diseases↗
PubMed2005

Meta-analysis: computed tomographic colonography.

BACKGROUND: Computed tomographic (CT) colonography, also called virtual colonoscopy, is an evolving technology under evaluation as a new method of screening for colorectal cancer. However, its performance as a test has varied widely across studies, and the reasons for these discrepancies are poorly defined. PURPOSE: To systematically review the test performance of CT colonography compared to colonoscopy or surgery and to assess variables that may affect test performance. DATA SOURCES: The PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched for English-language articles published between January 1975 and February 2005. STUDY SELECTION: Prospective studies of adults undergoing CT colonography after full bowel preparation, with colonoscopy or surgery as the gold standard, were selected. Studies had to have used state-of-the-art technology, including at least a single-detector CT scanner with supine and prone positioning, insufflation of the colon with air or carbon dioxide, collimation smaller than 5 mm, and both 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional views during scan interpretation. The evaluators of the colonogram had to be unaware of the findings from use of the gold standard test. Data on sensitivity and specificity overall and for detection of polyps less than 6 mm, 6 to 9 mm, and greater than 9 mm in size were abstracted. Sensitivities and specificities weighted by sample size were calculated, and heterogeneity was explored by using stratified analyses and meta-regression. DATA SYNTHESIS: 33 studies provided data on 6393 patients. The sensitivity of CT colonography was heterogeneous but improved as polyp size increased (48% [95% CI, 25% to 70%] for detection of polyps <6 mm, 70% [CI, 55% to 84%] for polyps 6 to 9 mm, and 85% [CI, 79% to 91%] for polyps >9 mm). Characteristics of the CT colonography scanner, including width of collimation, type of detector, and mode of imaging, explained some of this heterogeneity. In contrast, specificity was homogenous (92% [CI, 89% to 96%] for detection of polyps <6 mm, 93% [CI, 91% to 95%] for polyps 6 to 9 mm, and 97% [CI, 96% to 97%] for polyps >9 mm). LIMITATIONS: The studies differed widely, and the extractable variables explained only a small amount of the heterogeneity. In addition, only a few studies examined the newest CT colonography technology. CONCLUSIONS: Computed tomographic colonography is highly specific, but the range of reported sensitivities is wide. Patient or scanner characteristics do not fully account for this variability, but collimation, type of scanner, and mode of imaging explain some of the discrepancy. This heterogeneity raises concerns about consistency of performance and about technical variability. These issues must be resolved before CT colonography can be advocated for generalized screening for colorectal cancer.

Aged↗
PubMedDate not supplied

CAD techniques, challenges, and controversies in computed tomographic colonography.

Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for computed tomographic colonography (CTC) automatically detects the locations of suspicious polyps and masses on CTC and provides radiologists with a second opinion. CAD has the potential to increase radiologists' diagnostic performance in the detection of polyps and masses and to decrease variability of the diagnostic accuracy among readers without significantly increasing the reading time. Technical developments have advanced CAD substantially during the past several years, and a fundamental scheme for the detection of polyps has been established. The most recent CAD systems based on this scheme produce a clinically acceptable high sensitivity and a low false-positive rate. However, CAD for CTC is still under active development, and the technology needs to be improved further. This report describes the expected benefits, the current fundamental scheme, the key techniques used for detection of polyps and masses on CTC, the current detection performance, as well as the pitfalls, challenges, controversies, and the future of CAD.

Colonic Polyps↗
PubMed2005

The effect of prior colonic imaging on endoscopic productivity: potential impact of computed tomographic colonography.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: If computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is used for primary colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with a small polyp size threshold to define a CTC study as positive, a substantial portion of all colonoscopies performed annually will be to follow up positive CTC examinations. Moreover, the majority of positive CTC examinations would be false positives (FP). This case-control study was undertaken to test the hypothesis that colonoscopy examinations resulting from FP CTC studies would take longer to complete than negative screening colonoscopies. METHODS: Endoscopic records of a large, urban hospital were reviewed to identify all patients who had either a positive barium enema (BE) study or flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) and a negative follow-up colonoscopy examination (these patients were used as surrogates for CTC FP cases). For each of the 28 FP patients or cases identified, 2 screening colonoscopies performed by the same endoscopist within the same time period were identified and used as matched controls. A two-way analysis of variance test was performed to assess for differences in time to complete colonoscopies between these 2 groups, controlling for the individual endoscopist. RESULTS: FP colonoscopies took an average of 24.0 minutes to complete, whereas negative screening colonoscopies took 14.9 minutes; FP colonoscopies required 61% more active time to complete. This highly statistically significant difference (P < .0001) persisted with subset analyses that only included BE or FS cases and when fellow or surgeon cases were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: FP colonoscopies take longer to perform than negative screening colonoscopies. If CTC is implemented as the primary modality for CRC screening, these FP examinations could comprise a substantial percentage of the colonoscopies performed, potentially leading to a significant decrease in endoscopic productivity.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Computed tomographic colonography: assessment of radiologist performance with and without computer-aided detection.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In isolation, computer-aided detection (CAD) for computed tomographic (CT) colonography is as effective as optical colonoscopy for detection of significant adenomas. However, the unavoidable interaction between CAD and the reader has not been addressed. METHODS: Ten readers trained in CT but without special expertise in colonography interpreted CT colonography images of 107 patients (60 with 142 polyps), first without CAD and then with CAD after temporal separation of 2 months. Per-patient and per-polyp detection were determined by comparing responses with known patient status. RESULTS: With CAD, 41 (68%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 55%-80%) of the 60 patients with polyps were identified more frequently by readers. Per-patient sensitivity increased significantly in 70% of readers, while specificity dropped significantly in only one. Polyp detection increased significantly with CAD; on average, 12 more polyps were detected by each reader (9.1%, 95% CI, 5.2%-12.8%). Small- (< or =5 mm) and medium-sized (6-9 mm) polyps were significantly more likely to be detected when prompted correctly by CAD. However, overall performance was relatively poor; even with CAD, on average readers detected only 10 polyps (51.0%) > or =10 mm and 24 (38.2%) > or =6 mm. Interpretation time was shortened significantly with CAD: by 1.9 minutes (95% CI, 1.4-2.4 minutes) for patients with polyps and by 2.9 minutes (95% CI, 2.5-3.3 minutes) for patients without. Overall, 9 readers (90%) benefited significantly from CAD, either by increased sensitivity and/or by reduced interpretation time. CONCLUSIONS: CAD for CT colonography significantly increases per-patient and per-polyp detection and significantly reduces interpretation times but cannot substitute for adequate training.

Adenoma↗
PubMed2002

Detection of colorectal lesions with virtual computed tomographic colonography.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to compare the performance of virtual computed tomographic colonography with that of conventional colonoscopy in a blinded, prospective study in 165 patients with suspected colorectal lesions. METHODS: There were 165 patients, all referred for conventional colonoscopy, who underwent preliminary virtual computed tomographic colonography. Computed tomograhic images of all suspected lesions were analyzed and subsequently compared with conventional colonoscopy findings. RESULTS: There were 30 colorectal cancers and 37 polyps identified at conventional colonoscopy. Virtual computed tomographic colonography correctly detected all cancers, as well as 11 of 12 polyps of 10 mm in diameter or larger (sensitivity, 92%); 14 of 17 polyps between 6 and 9 mm (sensitivity, 82%); and 4 of 8 polyps of 5 mm or smaller (sensitivity, 50%). The per-patient sensitivity and specificity were 92% and 97%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual computed tomographic colonography has a diagnostic sensitivity similar to that of conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal lesions larger than 6 mm in diameter.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Role of virtual computed tomographic colonography in patients with colorectal cancers and obstructing colorectal lesions.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the ability of computed tomographic colonography to diagnose colorectal masses, stage colorectal cancers, image the proximal colon in obstructing colorectal lesions, and evaluate the anastomoses in patients with previous colorectal surgery. METHODS: We prospectively performed computed tomographic colonography examinations in 34 patients (20 males; mean age, 64.2; range, 19-91 years): 20 patients had colorectal masses (defined at endoscopy as intraluminal masses 2 cm or larger), 7 patients had benign obstructing colorectal strictures, and 7 patients had a prior colorectal resection. Final tumor staging was available in all 16 patients who had colorectal cancers and 15 patients were referred after incomplete colonoscopy. The ability of computed tomographic colonography to stage colorectal cancers, identify synchronous lesions in patients with colorectal masses, and image the proximal colon in patients with obstructing colorectal lesions was assessed. RESULTS: Computed tomographic colonography identified all colorectal masses, but overcalled two masses in patients who were either poorly distended or poorly prepared. Computed tomographic colonography correctly staged 13 of 16 colorectal cancers (81 percent) and detected 16 of 17 (93 percent) synchronous polyps. Computed tomographic colonography over-staged two Dukes Stage A cancers and understaged one Dukes Stage C cancer. A total of 97 percent (87/90) of all colonic segments were adequately visualized at computed tomographic colonography in patients with obstructing colorectal lesions compared with 60 percent (26/42) of segments at barium enema (P < 0.01). Colonic anastomoses were visualized in all nine patients, but in one patient, computed tomographic colonography could not distinguish between local tumor recurrence and surgical changes. CONCLUSION: Computed tomographic colonography can accurately identify all colorectal masses but may overcall stool as masses in poorly distended or poorly prepared colons. Computed tomographic colonography has an overall staging accuracy of 81 percent for colorectal cancer and is superior to barium enema in visualizing colonic segments proximal to obstructing colorectal lesions.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Colonic perforation after computed tomographic colonography in a patient with fibrostenosing Crohn's disease.

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) offers great promise in the management of patients with disorders of the colon. Few complications have been reported with its use thus far. We describe herein a case of colonic perforation during CTC in a patient with active stenosing ileocolonic Crohn's disease. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of CTC-related perforation in the setting of Crohn's disease, and the third reported perforation overall. Perforation likely occurred in this case due to barotrauma in the setting of colonic strictures and an inflamed, weakened colonic wall. Physician awareness of the increased risk of perforation with CTC in the setting of inflammatory and/or obstructive disease of the colon will allow for improved clinical decision-making in the care of these patients.

Anastomosis, Surgical↗
PubMed2004

Randomized single blind trial of two low-volume bowel preparations for screening computed tomographic colonography.

BACKGROUND: Bowel preparation is an important part of computed tomographic colonography (CTC); we evaluated two small-volume preparations for screening CTC with regard to quality of preparation and patient acceptability. METHODS: Asymptomatic subjects at average risk for colorectal cancer from a community-based CTC screening program were randomized to bowel preparation comprising magnesium/bisacodyl/picolax or polyethylene glycol (PEG)/picolax. CTC images were evaluated by a blinded investigator for residual feces and fluid; subjects completed a questionnaire regarding acceptability of the preparation. RESULTS: In 176 subjects randomized to magnesium/bisacodyl/picolax (n = 82) or PEG/picolax (n = 94), the former preparation was discontinued because of syncope or presyncope in four (5%) subjects. Another 137 subjects received PEG/picolax without a significant adverse event. There were no other major differences in acceptability of the preparations as reported by subjects. The quality of bowel preparations for reporting CTC was similar. CONCLUSION: For subjects having screening CTC, both small-volume bowel preparations are generally well tolerated and result in minimal fluid and fecal residue; however, the magnesium/bisacodyl/picolax preparation was accompanied by an unacceptable incidence of syncope and is no longer used by us.

Bisacodyl↗
PubMed2006

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) performance: one-year clinical follow-up.

AIM: Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) represents a valuable advance in imaging technology for patients with colonic symptoms who are unfit for or fail to complete investigation with conventional techniques of colonoscopy or barium enema. The aim of this study was to examine whether CTC was sufficient to exclude colorectal cancer in such a population. As our patients were unfit for or unable to complete conventional investigations, we used 1 year clinical follow-up to exclude colonic malignancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CTC examination was performed using multi-slice CT in patients fitting pre-determined criteria. All patients who had completed 12 months of follow-up after CTC were included. Data were extracted from patient records and lack of presentation within the 12 months following a negative CTC was assumed to equate to lack of colorectal cancer at initial investigation. RESULTS: One hundred and twelve patients underwent CTC with a median age of 78 years (range 39-95) and median follow-up of 18 months (range 12-26). CTC detected 7 colorectal cancers, with 3 false positives and 1 false negative, giving a sensitivity of 87.5% and specificity of 97.1% for the detection of colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: CTC is a good imaging tool for the exclusion of colorectal cancer in a population unfit for or unable to complete colonoscopy or barium enema, with reasonable sensitivity and specificity for detection of colorectal cancer. However, the optimum investigative strategy for fitter symptomatic individuals is still debated and should be clarified by the results of ongoing randomised controlled trials.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): blinded prospective comparison with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasia.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Computed tomographic colonography (CTC), also known as virtual colonoscopy, is a recently introduced imaging modality for the detection of colorectal neoplasia. The aim of our study was to evaluate the performance of CTC in a blinded comparison with conventional colonoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 66 consecutive, symptomatic patients underwent spiral computed tomography (CT) examination after standard bowel preparation. CT images were analyzed and subsequently compared with conventional colonoscopy findings. RESULTS: Conventional colonoscopy detected 15 colorectal carcinomas and 52 polyps. CTC correctly identified all carcinomas, 13 of 14 polyps greater than 10.0 mm (sensitivity 92.8 %; 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI); 77 - 100), 11 of 13 polyps between 6.0 and 9.0 mm (sensitivity 84.6 %; 95 % CI; 62 - 100), and six of 25 polyps smaller than 5.0 mm (sensitivity 24 %; 95 % CI; 6 - 42). The per-patient sensitivity and specificity were 93.7 % and 94.1 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Computed tomographic colonography is an accurate imaging modality for the detection of colorectal neoplasia, especially for lesions larger than 6.0 mm in diameter.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Evaluation of contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography in detection of local recurrent colorectal cancer.

AIM: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity of contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography in detecting local recurrence of colorectal cancer. METHODS: From January 2000 to December 2004, 434 patients after potentially curative resection for invasive colorectal cancer were followed up for a period ranging from 20 to 55 mo. Eighty of the four hundred and thirty-four patients showing strong clinical evidence for recurring colorectal cancer during the last follow-up were enrolled in this study. Each patient underwent contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography and colonoscopy on the same day. Any lesions, biopsies, identified during the colonoscopic examination, immediate complications and the duration of the procedure were recorded. The results of contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography were evaluated by comparing to those of colonoscopy, surgical finding, and clinical follow-up. RESULTS: Contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography had a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 83% and an overall accuracy of 94% in detecting local recurrent colorectal cancer. CONCLUSION: Conventional colonoscopy and contrast-enhanced tomographic colonography can complement each other in detecting local recurrence of colorectal cancer.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Computed tomographic colonography: comparison of two workstations.

PURPOSE: To compare two commercially available computed tomography (CT) colonography systems with respect to interobserver variability, the influence of level of expertise, and the gradual reduction of reviewing time for each system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two residents and two radiologists using Siemens CTAPP Colography software and Viatronix V3D-Colon software reviewed supine and prone CT acquisitions from 24 patients in a primary 3D endoluminal view. The observers graded each case with respect to technical quality and diagnostic value, assessed the presence of pathology, and indicated the time spent on the viewing. RESULTS: Significant differences were found in technical quality (P < 0.001) and diagnostic value (P<0.001) depending on which system was used, with higher scores for the Viatronix software. The agreement between specialists tended to be higher than that between residents (kappa=0.63 (0.30-0.95) vs. kappa=0.51 (0.21-0.81)), and the residents gave significantly (P < 0.001) higher scores of technical quality. However, the level of expertise had no significant impact on the assessments. We noted extensive variability in pathological lesions found by the different observers. The number of findings did not differ between workstations, but the viewers tended to report larger polyp sizes with the Viatronix software. The time needed for viewing decreased significantly from the first to the last examination viewed by each observer. CONCLUSION: Both the evaluated systems present trustworthy images of the human colon, but in a primary 3D setting the Viatronix software is favored owing to the user-friendly interface, higher experienced technical quality, and better diagnostic value.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Comparison of multidetector computed tomographic colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection of colorectal polyps and cancer.

BACKGROUND: Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a new technique for detecting colonic neoplasms. Data on the utility of this method in the Indian population are limited. METHODS: Forty-two patients with symptoms of colonic disease underwent CTC and conventional colonoscopy (CC) within one week of each other and the findings at these two investigations were compared. RESULTS: The entire colon could be evaluated in 38 patients on CTC and in 23 patients on CC. Of the 19 patients who had incomplete CC, 14 had occlusive colonic lesions. Of the 86 lesions detected on CC, 76 (88.4%) were correctly identified on CTC with regard to location and size. CTC was false negative for 10 lesions and false positive for 5 lesions in 3 patients. The sensitivity and specificity of CTC were 65% and 77%, respectively, for lesions 1-5 mm; 97% and 83% for 6-9 mm-sized lesions; and 100% and 100% for lesions 10 mm or larger. Extracolonic findings were seen in 24 of 42 patients (57%). CONCLUSIONS: CTC is reliable for detecting lesions 6 mm or larger in size. It permits evaluation of the region proximal to an occlusive growth, which is often not possible with CC.

Adolescent↗