Barium studies/virtual colonoscopy: the gastroenterologist's perspective

Screening for colorectal carcinoma

Colorectal carcinoma is the second most common cause of death in Canada. Because there is a precursor lesion (that is, the polyp), screening is critically important to prevent the disease through polyp removal-and failing that, to detect colorectal carcinoma at an early stage, when it can be cured. Several screening modalities are available, but colonoscopy is considered the best. People should avail themselves of such examinations, and physicians should encourage them to do so.

The GI fluoroscopy suite in the early twenty-first century

Since the application of cross-sectional imaging to the examination of the gastrointestinal tract, dramatic changes have occurred in the modern gastrointestinal fluoroscopic suite. Besides the great decrease in use of fluoroscopy, the types of fluoroscopic examinations requested and performed nowadays are different from those of just 2 or 3 decades ago. This paper will review the recent history and the current uses of fluoroscopy in adults at the beginning of the twenty-first century, illustrated by case images and utilization data from a large academic medical center. Fluoroscopy survives because of its unique illustration of motility in real-time, its superior detection and accurate localization of leaks in post-operative patients, and its ability to provide immediate answers and targeted examinations tailored to the individual patient.

Screening and surveillance of colorectal cancer

Although colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States, it is preventable. Screening modalities include fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, double-contrast barium enema, and colonoscopy. Colonoscopy allows effective detection and removal of precursor adenomatous polyps and is the dominant CRC screening modality. Emerging technologies include CT and MR colonography and fecal DNA tests. Effective and cost-effective surveillance after polypectomy and curative CRC resection requires balancing the protective effect of polypectomy while maximizing intervals between examinations; thus, estimation of the risk of recurrence determines the intensity of surveillance for individual patients.

Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We prospectively compared the performance of low-dose multidetector computed tomographic colonography (CTC) without cathartic preparation with that of colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps.

METHODS

A total of 203 patients underwent low-dose CTC without cathartic preparation followed by colonoscopy. Before CTC, fecal tagging was achieved by adding diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium to regular meals. No subtraction of tagged feces was performed. Colonoscopy was performed 3-7 days after CTC. Three readers interpreted the CTC examinations separately and independently using a primary 2-dimensional approach using multiplanar reconstructions and 3-dimensional images for further characterization. Colonoscopy with segmental unblinding was used as reference standard. The sensitivity of CTC was calculated both on a per-polyp and a per-patient basis. For the latter, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values were also calculated.

RESULTS

CTC had an average sensitivity of 95.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 92.1%-99%) for the identification of colorectal polyps > or =8 mm. With regard to per-patient analysis, CTC yielded an average sensitivity of 89.9% (95% CI, 86%-93.7%), an average specificity of 92.2% (95% CI, 89.5%-94.9%), an average positive predictive value of 88% (95% CI, 83.3%-91.5%), and an average negative predictive value of 93.5% (95% CI, 90.9%-96%). Interobserver agreement was high on a per-polyp basis (kappa statistic range, .61-.74) and high to excellent on a per-patient basis (kappa statistic range, .79-.91).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose multidetector CTC without cathartic preparation compares favorably with colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps.

Computed tomographic colonography compared with colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND & AIMS

To date, computed tomographic (CT) colonography has been compared with an imperfect test, colonoscopy, and has been mainly assessed in patients with positive screening test results or symptoms. Therefore, the available data may not apply to screening of patients with a personal or family history of colorectal polyps or cancer (increased risk). We prospectively investigated the ability of CT colonography to identify individuals with large (>or=10 mm) colorectal polyps in consecutive patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A total of 249 consecutive patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer underwent CT colonography before colonoscopy. Two reviewers interpreted CT colonography examinations independently. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were determined after meticulous matching of CT colonography with colonoscopy. Unexplained large false-positive findings were verified with a second-look colonoscopy.

RESULTS

In total, 31 patients (12%) had 48 large polyps at colonoscopy. This included 8 patients with 8 large polyps that were overlooked initially and detected at the second-look colonoscopy. In 6 of 8 patients, the missed polyp was the only large lesion. With CT colonography, 84% of patients (26/31) with large polyp(s) were identified, paired for a specificity of 92% (200-201/218). Positive and negative predictive values were 59%-60% (26/43-44) and 98% (200-201/205-206), respectively. CT colonography detected 75%-77% (36-37/48) of large polyps, with 9 of the missed lesions being flat.

CONCLUSIONS

CT colonography and colonoscopy have a similar ability to identify individuals with large polyps in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. The large proportion of missed flat lesions warrants further study.

CT colonography: feasibility of substantial dose reduction--comparison of medium to very low doses in identical patients

In a feasibility study, the authors compared polyp detection and interobserver variability at computed tomographic (CT) colonography in 15 patients with doses ranging from medium to very low (12.00-0.05 mSv). At levels down to 2% of the medium dose, the mean detection of polyps 5 mm or larger remained at least 74%, while the number of false-positive results decreased and the interobserver agreement remained constant. Initial observations indicate that it is feasible to reduce the radiation dose required for CT colonography. Further studies are needed, however, to investigate the clinical value of very low-dose CT colonography.

Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the performance characteristics of computed tomographic (CT) virtual colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasia in an average-risk screening population.

METHODS

A total of 1233 asymptomatic adults (mean age, 57.8 years) underwent same-day virtual and optical colonoscopy. Radiologists used the three-dimensional endoluminal display for the initial detection of polyps on CT virtual colonoscopy. For the initial examination of each colonic segment, the colonoscopists were unaware of the findings on virtual colonoscopy, which were revealed to them before any subsequent reexamination. The sensitivity and specificity of virtual colonoscopy and the sensitivity of optical colonoscopy were calculated with the use of the findings of the final, unblinded optical colonoscopy as the reference standard.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of virtual colonoscopy for adenomatous polyps was 93.8 percent for polyps at least 10 mm in diameter, 93.9 percent for polyps at least 8 mm in diameter, and 88.7 percent for polyps at least 6 mm in diameter. The sensitivity of optical colonoscopy for adenomatous polyps was 87.5 percent, 91.5 percent, and 92.3 percent for the three sizes of polyps, respectively. The specificity of virtual colonoscopy for adenomatous polyps was 96.0 percent for polyps at least 10 mm in diameter, 92.2 percent for polyps at least 8 mm in diameter, and 79.6 percent for polyps at least 6 mm in diameter. Two polyps were malignant; both were detected on virtual colonoscopy, and one of them was missed on optical colonoscopy before the results on virtual colonoscopy were revealed.

CONCLUSIONS

CT virtual colonoscopy with the use of a three-dimensional approach is an accurate screening method for the detection of colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic average-risk adults and compares favorably with optical colonoscopy in terms of the detection of clinically relevant lesions.

Colon cancer during pregnancy

The medical community should become mobilized to diagnose colon cancer earlier in pregnancy to improve prognosis. The primary care physician or obstetrician should refer the pregnant patient with significant gastrointestinal complaints to the gastroenterologist for evaluation. Likewise, the gastroenterologist should be prepared to perform sigmoidoscopy, preferably without endoscopic medications, for significant lower gastrointestinal symptoms such as persistent rectal bleeding. Sigmoidoscopy is particularly sensitive in identifying colon cancer in pregnant patients because their cancers are usually distal and within reach of the sigmoidoscope.