CTC technique: methods to ensure an optimal exam

[CT colonography : Technique and indications]

BACKGROUND

Dedicated radiological expertise and a high-quality examination, performed according to current technical standards and for accepted indications, are prerequisite to achieve excellent results with CT colonography (CTC).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this article is to review current standards of the examination technique as well as indications and contraindications for CTC based on recent recommendations and guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on extensive literature research, current knowledge about the examination technique and the indications and contraindications is summarized.

RESULTS

CTC is the radiological examination of choice for the detection of colorectal neoplasia. Beside incomplete or refused colonoscopy and contraindications to colonoscopy, CTC is also a noninvasive option for opportunistic colorectal cancer screening. The examination technique is based on a CTC-specific patient preparation scheme that includes fecal tagging, colonic distension, low-dose CT scans in two patient positions and a combined 2D and 3D data evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing CTC according to current technical standards is prerequisite for high-quality examinations and is, thus, also a key factor to obtain a correct diagnosis. CTC is a noninvasive examination, capable of providing clinically relevant diagnoses for a wide range of indications.

Comparison of two Meglumine-Diatrizoate based bowel preparations for computed tomography colonography: Comparison of patient symptoms and bowel preparation quality

INTRODUCTION

To investigate the impact of two Meglumine-Diatrizoate based bowel preparation regimes for computed tomography colonography (CTC) on the patient experience and image quality.

METHODS

100 patients consumed Meglumine-Diatrizoate at 24 h and 12 h prior to the CTC examination. 50 patients followed regime 1 (50:50), 50 ml of Meglumine-Diatrizoate at both 24 and 12 h prior to the examination. 50 patients followed regime 2 (75:25), 75 ml of Meglumine-Diatrizoate at 24 h prior to the examination and 25 ml of Meglumine-Diatrizoate at 12 h prior to the examination. All patients completed a questionnaire to indicate the time of onset of adverse effects and when they were most severe. Five advanced practitioners assessed the image quality in a visual grading study. Visual grading characteristic (VGC) analysis was applied with regime 1 as the reference condition and regime 2 and test condition; test alpha was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

Image quality was assessed with successful bowel cleansing as the scoring criteria for the visual grading study. The bowel cleansing as provided by the two Meglumine-Diatrizoate regimes was revealed not to be statistically different, with the area under the VGC curve and 95% confidence intervals 0.487 (0.287, 0.701), p = 0.887. Patients taking the 75:25 bowel preparation experienced a shorter median time to the onset of adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

There was no observed difference in Image quality criteria score for the two Meglumine-Diatrizoate based bowel preparation with more predictable adverse effects of Meglumine-Diatrizoate with the 75:25 preparation.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Providing patients with a higher contrast burden 24 h prior to CTC may have a positive impact on the patient experience without compromising image quality.

Anorectal pitfalls in computed tomography colonography

There is a wide array of pathological lesions seen in the anorectal region with CT colonography (CTC), much of which is unique to this location. Many relatively common findings in the anorectal region are typically benign, but can be misinterpreted as malignant. There are also technique-related pitfalls that can impede accurate diagnosis of anorectal findings at CTC. Understanding common and uncommon lesions in the anorectal region as well as recognizing technical pitfalls will optimize interpretation of CTC and decrease the number of missed cancers and false positives. This review will systematically cover that they key pitfalls confronting the radiologist at CTC interpretation of the anorectal region, primarily dividing them into those related to underlying anatomy and those related to technique. Tips for how to effectively handle these potential pitfalls will also be discussed.