Performance of CT colonography for detecting small, diminutive, and flat polyps

Positive Predictive Value for Colorectal Lesions at CT Colonography: Analysis of Factors Impacting Results in a Large Screening Cohort

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to evaluate factors affecting the positive predictive value (PPV) for detecting colorectal lesions at CT colonography (CTC), using optical colonoscopy (OC) as the reference standard for concordance. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Consecutive CTC studies from a single screening program interpreted as positive for at least one detected colorectal lesion 6 mm or larger and sent for subsequent OC were analyzed according to per-polyp and per-patient results. Univariable and multivariable analysis of multiple input factors was performed. RESULTS. Of 1650 studies (median patient age, 59.7 years; 877 men and 773 women) with 2688 total CTC-detected lesions 6 mm or larger, the overall PPVs were 88.8% (2386/2688) by polyp and 90.8% (1499/1650) by patient. The by-polyp PPV was significantly higher for polypoid (91.2%; 1793/1965) versus flat or nonpolypoid (79.4%; 459/578) lesions (p < 0.0001). Overall per-patient PPVs were 72.3% (1193/1650) for any neoplasia 6 mm or larger and 38.8% (641/1650) for advanced neoplasia. PPVs for advanced neoplasia increased by CTC Reporting and Data System category: 5.8% (45/781) for C2, 67.1% (511/762) for C3, and 79.4% (85/107) for C4. PPVs for cancer also increased by CTC Reporting and Data System category: 0% (0/781) for C2, 2.2% (17/762) for C3, and 52.3% (56/107) for C4. On multivariable regression analysis, polyp morphologic type (flat vs polypoid) and diagnostic confidence were the strongest predictors of CTC-OC concordance. CTC PPV results are somewhat underestimated because 28.8% (87/302) of CTC-OC-discordant results were categorized as likely OC false-negatives at consensus review. CONCLUSION. Concordance between CTC and OC is high for relevant colorectal polyps and masses. Unlike stool-based tests that provide only a binary positive or negative result, CTC can specify the nature of the positive findings, resulting in much greater specificity and risk stratification for patient management decisions.

Computed Tomography Colonography vs Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Surveillance After Surgery

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Recommendations for surveillance after curative surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) include a 1-year post-resection abdominal-pelvic computed tomography (CT) scan and optical colonoscopy (OC). CT colonography (CTC), when used in CRC screening, effectively identifies colorectal polyps ≥10 mm and cancers. We performed a prospective study to determine whether CTC, concurrent with CT, could substitute for OC in CRC surveillance.

METHODS

Our study enrolled 231 patients with resected stage 0-III CRC, identified at 5 tertiary care academic centers. Approximately 1 year after surgery, participants underwent outpatient CTC plus CT, followed by same-day OC. CTC results were revealed after endoscopic visualization of sequential colonic segments, which were re-examined for discordant findings. The primary outcome was performance of CTC in the detection of colorectal adenomas and cancers using endoscopy as the reference standard.

RESULTS

Of the 231 participants, 116 (50.2%) had polyps of any size or histology identified by OC, and 15.6% had conventional adenomas and/or serrated polyps ≥6 mm. No intra-luminal cancers were detected. CTC detected patients with polyps of ≥6 mm with 44.0% sensitivity (95% CI, 30.2-57.8) and 93.4% specificity (95% CI, 89.7-97.0). CTC detected polyps ≥10 mm with 76.9% sensitivity (95% CI, 54.0-99.8) and 89.0% specificity (95% CI, 84.8-93.1). Similar values were found when only adenomatous polyps were considered. The negative predictive value of CTC for adenomas ≥6 mm was 90.7% (95% CI, 86.7-94.5) and for adenomas ≥10 mm the negative predictive value was 98.6% (95% CI, 97.0-100).

CONCLUSIONS

In a CRC surveillance population 1 year following resection, CTC was inferior to OC for detecting patients with polyps ≥6 mm. Clinical Trials.gov Registration Number: NCT02143115.

Colorectal Findings at Repeat CT Colonography Screening after Initial CT Colonography Screening Negative for Polyps Larger than 5 mm

Purpose To determine the rate and types of polyps detected at repeat computed tomographic (CT) colonography screening after initial negative findings at CT colonography screening. Materials and Methods Among 5640 negative CT colonography screenings (no polyps ≥ 6 mm) performed before 2010 at one medical center, 1429 (25.3%; mean age, 61.4 years; 736 women, 693 men) patients have returned for repeat CT colonography screening (mean interval, 5.7 years ± 0.9; range, 4.5-10.7 years). Positive rates and histologic findings of initial and repeat screening were compared in this HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study. For all patients with positive findings at repeat CT colonography, the findings were directly compared against the initial CT colonography findings. Fisher exact, Pearson χ², and Student t tests were applied as indicated. Results Repeat CT colonography screening was positive for lesions 6 mm or larger in 173 (12.1%) adults (compared with 14.3% at initial CT colonography screening, P = .29). In the 173 patients, 29.5% (61 of 207) of nondiminutive polyps could be identified as diminutive at the initial CT colonography and 12.6% (26 of 207) were missed. Large polyps, advanced neoplasia (advanced adenomas and cancer), and invasive cancer were seen in 3.8% (55 of 1429), 2.8% (40 of 1429), and 0.14% (two of 1429), respectively, at follow-up, compared with 5.2% (P = .02), 3.2% (P = .52), and 0.45% (P = .17), respectively, at initial screening. Of 42 advanced lesions in 40 follow-up screenings, 33 (78.6%) were right sided and 22 (52.4%) were flat, compared with 45.4% (P < .001) and 11.3% (P < .001), respectively, at initial screening. Large right-sided serrated lesions were confirmed in 20 individuals (1.4%), compared with 0.5% (P < .001) confirmed at initial screening. Conclusion Positive rates for large polyps at repeat CT colonography screening (3.7%) were lower compared with those at initial screening (5.2%). However, more advanced right-sided lesions were detected at follow-up CT colonography, many of which were flat, serrated lesions. The cumulative findings support both the nonreporting of diminutive lesions and a 5-10-year screening interval. ^© RSNA, 2016 An earlier incorrect version of this article appeared online. This article was corrected on August 30, 2016.

Colorectal laterally spreading tumors by computed tomographic colonography

To date, few reports focused primarily on detecting colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) have been published. The aim of this study was to determine the visibility of LSTs on computed tomographic colonography (CTC) compared with that on colonoscopy as a standard. We retrospectively reviewed and matched data on endoscopic and CTC reports in 157 patients (161 LSTs) who received a multidetector CT scan using contrast media immediately after total colonoscopy at the National Cancer Center Hospital in Tokyo, Japan, between December 2005 and August 2010. The results of the total colonoscopy were known at the time of the CTC procedure and reading. Of the 161 LSTs detected on colonoscopy, 138 were observed and matched by CTC (86%). Of the 91 granular type LSTs (LST-Gs), 88 (97%) were observed and matched, while of the 70 non-granular type LSTs (LST-NGs), 50 (71%) were observed and matched by CTC (p < 0.0001). CTC enabled observation of 73% (22/30) of 20–29 mm, 83% (35/42) of 30–39 mm, 88% (49/56) of 40–59 mm, and 97% (32/33) of ≥60 mm tumors. The rate of observed LSTs by CTC was 86% (97% of LST-G, 71% of LST-NG) of the LSTs found during total colonoscopy.

Missed lesions at CT colonography: lessons learned

Misinterpretation at CT colonography (CTC) can result in either a colorectal lesion being missed (false-negative) or a false-positive diagnosis. This review will largely focus on potential missed lesions-and ways to avoid such misses. The general causes of false-negative interpretation at CTC can be broadly characterized and grouped into discrete categories related to suboptimal study technique, specific lesion characteristics, anatomic location, and imaging artifacts. Overlapping causes further increase the likelihood of missing a clinically relevant lesion. In the end, if the technical factors of bowel preparation, colonic distention, and robust CTC software are adequately addressed on a consistent basis, and the reader is aware of all the potential pitfalls at CTC, important lesions will seldom be missed.

Precancerous colorectal lesions (Review)

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common and often lethal tumor. Over the last 25 years, remarkable progress has been made in understanding its biological and molecular features and in elucidating the steps involved in colon carcinogenesis. This, in turn, has led to a more rational and effective clinical approach to the treatment of CRC. While colorectal adenoma is the most frequent precancerous lesion, other potentially premalignant conditions, including chronic inflammatory bowel diseases and hereditary syndromes, such as familial adenomatous polyposis, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome and juvenile polyposis, involve different sites of the gastrointestinal tract with an overall incidence of less than 5%. In all such cases, disease recognition at an early stage is essential to devise suitable preventive cancer strategies. These topics are addressed in this review, along with the most important epidemiological, pathogenetic and clinical features that lead to malignant transformation. Novel biomarkers for early cancer prediction, detection, prognostic evolution, and the response to treatment are critically assessed as well. Continued improvements in our knowledge of the molecular basis of CRC and the transfer of this information into daily clinical practice will reduce the burden of this disease.

Computed tomography colonography: emerging evidence to further support clinical effectiveness

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Computed tomography colonography (CTC) continues to mature and evolve as a noninvasive imaging test of the large intestine. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the recent and emerging data that further supports the clinical effectiveness of CTC.

RECENT FINDINGS

The diagnostic performance of CTC for detecting colorectal polyps and masses is well established, but its precise clinical role is yet to be determined. Recent data on test performance, patient acceptance, and study technique may help to clarify the role of CTC and accelerate its clinical implementation.

SUMMARY

Recent advances and refinements in CTC should help to clarify and expand its clinical role, both as a screening and diagnostic test. High patient acceptance for CTC could lead to increased adherence rates. Ultimately, the complementary nature of CTC and optical colonoscopy should result in improved patient care.

Colorectal cancer screening in women: an underutilized lifesaver

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) represents the third most common cancer diagnosed and a major cause of cancer-related deaths in women. Despite strong evidence that early screening decreases colorectal cancer incidence and mortality rates, colorectal cancer screening rates in women still lag significantly behind screening rates for breast and cervical cancers. Additionally, women have been found to be less likely than men to undergo CRC screening. This is despite the fact that the overall lifetime risk for the development of colorectal carcinoma is similar in both sexes. Barriers to screening have been found to be different for women compared with men. Screening adherence in women also appears to be associated with various social and demographic factors.

CONCLUSION

CT colonography (CTC) is an accurate, minimally invasive, and well-tolerated examination that is newly endorsed by the American Cancer Society, U.S. Multisociety Task Force, and the American College of Radiology. Improved screening compliance may occur in women with further dissemination of CTC.

Performance of CT colonography for detecting small, diminutive, and flat polyps

The primary goal of colorectal cancer screening and prevention is the detection and removal of advanced neoplasia. Computerized tomography (CT) colonography is now well established as an effective screening test. Areas of greater uncertainty include the performance characteristics of CT colonography for detecting small (6-9 mm), diminutive (< or =5 mm), and flat (nonpolypoid) lesions. However, the actual clinical relevance of small, diminutive, and flat polyps has also been the source of debate. This article addresses these controversial and often misunderstood issues.