ACR Appropriateness Criteria colorectal cancer screening

Multicentre, prospective, randomised study comparing the diagnostic yield of colon capsule endoscopy versus CT colonography in a screening population (the TOPAZ study)

OBJECTIVE

Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has shown promise for colorectal neoplasia detection compared with optical colonoscopy (OC), but has not been compared with other screening tests in average risk screening patients.

DESIGN

Patients 50 to 75 years of age (African Americans, 45-75 years) were randomised to CCE or CT colonography (CTC) and subsequent blinded OC. The primary endpoint was diagnostic yield of polyps ≥6 mm with CCE or CTC. Secondary endpoints included accuracy for size and histology, examination completeness, number/proportion of subjects with polyps and adenomas ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm, subject satisfaction and safety.

RESULTS

From 320 enrolled subjects, data from 286 (89.4%) were evaluable. The proportion of subjects with any polyp ≥6 mm confirmed by OC was 31.6% for CCE versus 8.6% for CTC (pPr non-inferiority and superiority=0.999). The diagnostic yield of polyps ≥10 mm was 13.5% with CCE versus 6.3% with CTC (pPr non-inferiority=0.9954). The sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps ≥6 mm was 79.2% and 96.3% while that of CTC was 26.8% and 98.9%. The sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps ≥10 mm was 85.7% and 98.2% compared with 50% and 99.1% for CTC. Both tests were well tolerated/safe.

CONCLUSION

CCE was superior to CTC for detection of polyps ≥6 mm and non-inferior for identification of polyps ≥10 mm. CCE should be considered comparable or superior to CTC as a colorectal neoplasia screening test, although neither test is as effective as OC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02754661.

Update on Flexible Sigmoidoscopy, Computed Tomographic Colonography, and Capsule Colonoscopy

This article reviews alternative colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests, including flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), computed tomography (CT) colonography, and colon capsule endoscopy. FS has abundant and convincing evidence supporting its use for CRC screening and is a commonly used CRC test worldwide. CT colonography has demonstrated convincing results for CRC screening, but concerns regarding cost, accuracy for flat or sessile neoplasia, reproducibility, extracolonic findings, and lack of coverage have limited its use and development. Colon capsule endoscopy has demonstrated encouraging results for polyp detection in average-risk individuals, but is not approved for CRC screening at the current time.

Electronic cleansing of tagged residue in CT colonography: what radiologists need to know

CT colonography (CTC) is the radiological examination of choice for the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia. Faecal tagging is considered a mandatory part of bowel preparation. However, the colonic mucosa, obscured by tagged residue, is not accessible to endoluminal 3D views and requires time-consuming 2D evaluation. Electronic cleansing (EC) software algorithms can overcome this limitation by digitally subtracting tagged residue from the colonic lumen. Ideally, this enables a seamless 3D endoluminal evaluation. Despite this benefit, EC is a potential source of a wide range of artefacts. Accurate EC requires proper CTC examination technique and faecal tagging. The digital subtraction process has been shown to affect the relevant morphological features of both colonic anatomy and colonic lesions, if submerged under faecal residue. This article summarises the potential effects of EC on CTC imaging, the consequences for reporting and patient management, and strategies to avoid pitfalls. Furthermore, potentially negative effects on clinical reporting and patient management are shown, and problem-solving techniques, as well as recommendations for the appropriate use of EC techniques, are presented. Radiologists using EC should be familiar with EC-related effects on polyp size and also with correct measurement techniques.

Whole-body computed tomography: a new point of view in a hospital check-up unit? Our experience in 6516 patients

BACKGROUND

There is a growing awareness that prevention and early diagnosis may reduce the high mortality associated with cancer, cardiovascular and other diseases. The role of whole-body computed tomography (WB-CT) in self-referred and asymptomatic patients has been debated.

AIM

To determine frequency and spectrum of WB-CT findings in average-risk subjects derived from a Medical-Check-Up-Unit, to evaluate recommendations reported and distribution according to sex and age-groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 6516 subjects who underwent WB-CT (June 2004/February 2015). All were > 40 years and referred by Medical-Check-Up-Unit of our hospital. The main findings were categorized and classified as normal or not. Its distribution according to sex and age-groups was evaluated using Chi-square test and linear-by-linear association test, respectively. Number of recommendations, type and interval of follow-up were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used.

RESULTS

WB-CT performed in 6516 patients (69% men, 31% women, mean age = 58.4 years) revealed chest (81.4%), abdominal (93.06%) and spine (65.39%) abnormalities. Only 1.60% had completely normal exploration. Abnormal WB-CT in men was significantly higher than women (98.64% vs. 97.87%; p = 0.021), with significant increase as age was higher (40-49 years: 95.65%; 50-59 years: 98.33%; 60-69 years: 99.47%; > 69 years: 99.89%) (p < 0.001). Although most findings were benign, we detected 1.47% primary tumors (96, mainly 35 kidneys and 15 lungs). 17.39% of patients received at least one recommendation predominantly in chest (78.19%) and follow-up imaging (69.89%).

CONCLUSION

The most common WB-CT findings in asymptomatic subjects are benign. However, this examination allows identifying an important number of relevant and precocious findings that significantly increase with age, involving changes in lifestyle and precocious treatment.

Imaging of the Postoperative Colon

Recognition of postoperative complications is important for the immediate diagnosis and treatment needed for appropriate patient care. Identification of postoperative complications from colon surgery requires not only knowledge of the type of procedure, but also the expected normal postoperative appearance. The purpose of this article is to discuss and review the expected anatomic changes after colorectal surgery, and the appearance of the most common postoperative complications.

Transabdominal Ultrasound Colonography for Detection of Colorectal Neoplasms: Initial Clinical Experience

We investigated the feasibility of using ultrasound colonography (USC) to visualize the healthy colon and rectum and detect colorectal polyps. Eight healthy volunteers underwent USC after standard bowel preparation. The feasibility and image quality of USC in different segments were evaluated. Then, USC was conducted on eight patients with known colonic neoplasms using colonoscopy as the reference standard. For volunteers, USC examinations were successfully performed on four (50.0%) ascending, three (37.5%) transverse and eight (100%) descending colons, as well as all sigmoid colons and rectums. One of four (25.0%) ascending, two of eight (25.0%) descending and all sigmoid colons and rectums were well visualized and free of artifacts. For patients, colonoscopy revealed that eight patients had 17 neoplasms in the distal sigmoid colon and rectum, which included 3 lesions ≤5 mm, 3 lesions 6-9 mm and 11 lesions ≥10 mm. USC visualized 12 of 17 (70.6%) neoplasms. Lesion detection by USC was 0% (0/3), 33.3% (1/3) and 100% (11/11) for neoplasms ≤5, 6-9 mm and ≥10 mm in size. USC can visualize the sigmoid colon and rectum well and detect distal sigmoid and rectal neoplasms ≥10 mm in diameter.

Reassessing medicare trends in diagnostic CT colonography after achieving CPT code category I status

PURPOSE

Compare national trends in utilization and coverage of diagnostic (non-screening) computed tomography colonography (CTC) in the Medicare population before and after achieving Current Procedural Terminology(®) (CPT) Category I code status in 2010.

METHODS

Claims by provider type and location for diagnostic CTC were identified between 2005 and 2013 using Medicare Physician Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files. Frequencies of billed and denied services were used to calculate denial rates for CTC and abdominal computed tomography (CT). PubMed search for articles with "CT colonography" in abstract or title during 1997-2013 was performed. Publications were recorded yearly and matched to CTC denial rates.

RESULTS

Annual Medicare claims for diagnostic CTC increased 212% during 2005-2009 in Category III status and increased 27.4% during 2009-2013 after implementation of Category I codes. Claims for abdominal CT rose 13.4% over the same overall period. Denial rates decreased from 70% to 32.8% between 2005 and 2009, and fluctuated between 24.7 and 30.6% thereafter. Denial rates for abdominal CT remained constant (4.1%-4.6%). From 2005 to 2013, services grew most in the private office (1678-7293) and hospital outpatient (1644-6449) settings with radiologists performing 93.3% of CTC. 1037 CTC publications were identified which increased 3567% between 1997 (3) and 2008 (107), plateaued until 2010 (114) and declined thereafter (75 in 2013).

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic CTC grew dramatically from 2005 to 2009, but slowed thereafter; even after achieving CPT Category I code status in 2010. Medicare denial rates declined during early years but later stabilized which paralleled a slowing in new peer-reviewed research. CTC continues to be performed predominately by radiologists in the outpatient setting.

Ultrasound virtual endoscopy: Polyp detection and reliability of measurement in an in vitro study with pig intestine specimens

AIM: To present our initial experience regarding the feasibility of ultrasound virtual endoscopy (USVE) and its measurement reliability for polyp detection in an in vitro study using pig intestine specimens.

METHODS: Six porcine intestine specimens containing 30 synthetic polyps underwent USVE, computed tomography colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) for polyp detection. The polyp measurement defined as the maximum polyp diameter on two-dimensional (2D) multiplanar reformatted (MPR) planes was obtained by USVE, and the absolute measurement error was analyzed using the direct measurement as the reference standard.

RESULTS: USVE detected 29 (96.7%) of 30 polyps, remaining a 7-mm one missed. There was one false-positive finding. Twenty-six (89.7%) of 29 reconstructed images were clearly depicted, while 29 (96.7%) of 30 polyps were displayed on CTC with one false-negative finding. In OC, all the polyps were detected. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.876 (95%CI: 0.745-0.940) for measurements obtained with USVE. The pooled absolute measurement errors ± the standard deviations of the depicted polyps with actual sizes ≤ 5 mm, 6-9 mm, and ≥ 10 mm were 1.9 ± 0.8 mm, 0.9 ± 1.2 mm, and 1.0 ± 1.4 mm, respectively.

CONCLUSION: USVE is reliable for polyp detection and measurement in in vitro study.

Colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer had a low incidence several decades ago. However, it has become a predominant cancer and now accounts for approximately 10% of cancer-related mortality in western countries. The 'rise' of colorectal cancer in developed countries can be attributed to the increasingly ageing population, unfavourable modern dietary habits and an increase in risk factors, such as smoking, low physical exercise and obesity. New treatments for primary and metastatic colorectal cancer have emerged, providing additional options for patients; these treatments include laparoscopic surgery for primary disease, more-aggressive resection of metastatic disease (such as liver and pulmonary metastases), radiotherapy for rectal cancer, and neoadjuvant and palliative chemotherapies. However, these new treatment options have had limited impact on cure rates and long-term survival. For these reasons, and the recognition that colorectal cancer is long preceded by a polypoid precursor, screening programmes have gained momentum. This Primer provides an overview of the current state of the art of knowledge on the epidemiology and mechanisms of colorectal cancer, as well as on diagnosis and treatment.

Smart Colonography for Distributed Medical Databases with Group Kernel Feature Analysis

Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) of polyps in Computed Tomographic (CT) colonography is currently very limited since a single database at each hospital/institution doesn't provide sufficient data for training the CAD system's classification algorithm. To address this limitation, we propose to use multiple databases, (e.g., big data studies) to create multiple institution-wide databases using distributed computing technologies, which we call smart colonography. Smart colonography may be built by a larger colonography database networked through the participation of multiple institutions via distributed computing. The motivation herein is to create a distributed database that increases the detection accuracy of CAD diagnosis by covering many true-positive cases. Colonography data analysis is mutually accessible to increase the availability of resources so that the knowledge of radiologists is enhanced. In this article, we propose a scalable and efficient algorithm called Group Kernel Feature Analysis (GKFA), which can be applied to multiple cancer databases so that the overall performance of CAD is improved. The key idea behind the proposed GKFA method is to allow the feature space to be updated as the training proceeds with more data being fed from other institutions into the algorithm. Experimental results show that GKFA achieves very good classification accuracy.

CT colonography: a survey of general practitioners' knowledge and interest

PURPOSE

To verify the knowledge and interest of general practitioners on computed tomography colonography (CTC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 2014, a Web-based questionnaire was proposed to all general practitioners of [Milan, Italy]. The questionnaire consisted of ten questions concerning general practitioners' knowledge about CTC, including application of guidelines in clinical scenarios and diagnostic performance.

RESULTS

Out of 1,053 general practitioners, 231 (22%), 155 men and 76 women (mean age 58 years), completed the survey. We found a significant difference between the age of responders and that of non-responders (p = 0.0033). Of the 231 responders, 84% were aware of the possibility of using CTC as a method for examining the colon-rectum. However, only 57% were aware about low X-ray exposure delivered by CTC and about the possibility of using a reduced cleansing protocol. Only 48% were aware that CTC accuracy in diagnosing 10-mm or larger polyps and colorectal cancers was similar to that of conventional colonoscopy, while 62% were informed about CTC advantages in comparison with double-contrast barium enema; 59% thought that CTC had a potential role as a screening test; 85-86% suggested CTC in the case of refused or incomplete conventional colonoscopy; 79% suggested immediate conventional colonoscopy in the case of at least one 10-mm polyp. About 54% usually prescribe one CTC every 4-6 months, while 36% never have, 3% one CTC per month, and 7% one every 2-3 months. Ninety-four per cent declared that they were willing to attend a course on CTC.

CONCLUSION

General practitioners have limited knowledge concerning CTC. Radiological societies should fill this gap offering dedicated educational initiatives.