Prevalence and impact of extracolonic findings in patients undergoing CT colonography

Longitudinal follow-up of incidental renal calculi on computed tomography

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Measuring small kidney stones on CT is a time-consuming task often neglected. Volumetric assessment provides a better measure of size than linear dimensions. Our objective is to analyze the growth rate and prognosis of incidental kidney stones in asymptomatic patients on CT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 4266 scans from 2030 asymptomatic patients who underwent two or more nonenhanced CT scans for colorectal screening between 2004 and 2016. The DL software identified and measured the volume, location, and attenuation of 883 stones. The corresponding scans were manually evaluated, and patients without follow-up were excluded. At each follow-up, the stones were categorized as new, growing, persistent, or resolved. Stone size (volume and diameter), attenuation, and location were correlated with the outcome and growth rates of the stones.

RESULTS

The stone cohort comprised 407 scans from 189 (M: 124, F: 65, median age: 55.4 years) patients. The median number of stones per scan was 1 (IQR: [1, 2]). The median stone volume was 17.1 mm3 (IQR: [7.4, 43.6]) and the median peak attenuation was 308 HU (IQR: [204, 532]. The 189 initial scans contained 291stones; 91 (31.3%) resolved, 142 (48.8%) grew, and 58 (19.9) remained persistent at the first follow-up. At the second follow-up (for 27 patients with 2 follow-ups), 14/44 (31.8%) stones had resolved, 19/44 (43.2%) grew and 11/44 (25%) were persistent. The median growth rate of growing stones was 3.3 mm3/year, IQR: [1.4,7.4]. Size and attenuation had a moderate correlation (Spearman rho 0.53, P < .001 for volume, and 0.50 P < .001 for peak attenuation) with the growth rate. Growing and persistent stones had significantly greater maximum axial diameter (2.7 vs 2.3 mm, P =.047) and peak attenuation (300 vs 258 HU, P =.031) CONCLUSION: We report a 12.7% prevalence of incidental kidney stones in asymptomatic adults, of which about half grew during follow-up with a median growth rate of about 3.3 mm3/year.

Automated Assessment of Renal Calculi in Serial Computed Tomography Scans

An automated pipeline is developed for the serial assessment of renal calculi using computed tomography (CT) scans obtained at multiple time points. This retrospective study included 722 scans from 330 patients chosen from 8544 asymptomatic patients who underwent two or more CTC (CT colonography) or non-enhanced abdominal CT scans between 2004 and 2016 at a single medical center. A pre-trained deep learning (DL) model was used to segment the kidneys and the calculi on the CT scans at each time point. Based on the output of the DL, 330 patients were identified as having a stone candidate on at least one time point. Then, for every patient in this group, the kidneys from different time points were registered to each other, and the calculi present at multiple time points were matched to each other using proximity on the registered scans. The automated pipeline was validated by having a blinded radiologist assess the changes manually. New graph-based metrics are introduced in order to evaluate the performance of our pipeline. Our method shows high fidelity in tracking changes in renal calculi over multiple time points.

Colonic lipomas revisited on CT colonography

PURPOSE

CT colonography (CTC) is growing in its utilization as a nationally approved colorectal cancer screening test. After colonic polyps, lipomas are the second most common colonic lesions and their accurate and rapid recognition are important.

METHODS

This retrospective Institutional Review Board approved study was performed at two large academic university-based institutions. 1044 patients underwent CTC at Institution A from 2010 to 2018 and 1094 patients underwent CTC at Institution B from 2003 to 2015. All CTC examinations with at least one colonic lipoma in their report were evaluated by a fellowship-trained abdominal imaging radiologist. 47 CTC examinations containing 59 colonic lipomas were detected and included. Segmental location, sessile versus pedunculated morphology, multiplicity, average attenuation, and largest lesion diameter were evaluated. A review of the current literature on colonic lipomas is entailed.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of colonic lipoma was 2.2% in women and 2.3% in men. Mean age for detection of colonic lipomas on CTC was 66.9 years. Segmental locations of colonic lipomas include ascending colon (39%), transverse colon (19%), ileocecal valve (12%), cecum (12%), descending colon (10%), and rectosigmoid (8%). 9% of colonic lipomas were multiple, 42% were pedunculated, and 58% were sessile. The mean (range) size of detected lipomas was 19 (6-59) mm. The mean (range) attenuation was - 132 (- 41 to - 258) HU.

CONCLUSION

Most colonic lipomas are located in the ascending colon. Although they are typically solitary, just under 10% are multiple, and although they are most often sessile, slightly under half are pedunculated mimicking polyps. CTC detects smaller lipomas than optical colonoscopy.

Impact of Incidental Findings During the Evaluation of Live Kidney Donors on Post-Transplant Outcomes: A Single Center Analysis

BACKGROUND

A careful assessment of a living donor is mandatory to minimize the short- and long-term risk related to kidney donation. In this study, we evaluated the incidence of incidental findings (IFs) in a large population of potential living kidney donors. Moreover, this study evaluated if the presence of IFs could influence the chance of living kidney donation and post-transplant outcomes.

METHODS

One hundred and sixty consecutive potential prospective living kidney transplant donors, who underwent a multidetector computed tomography angiography (MDCTA), were included in the study. An IF was defined as an incidentally discovered mass or lesion, detected by computed tomography angiography during the imaging evaluation of potential living donors. Clinical outcomes of living donors with IF were compared with those without IF.

RESULTS

In 10 patients (6.2%) an incidental finding was detected at MDCTA assessment. Among the 10 patients presenting with an IF, 7 patients (4.3%) were excluded from the living donation: 2 patients with an adrenal lesion, 3 patients with cancer, and 2 patients with a large (>8 cm) renal cyst. Graft and patient survival of kidney transplant recipients of donors with IFs were not significantly different to those receiving a kidney from living donors without IFs.

CONCLUSIONS

Incidental findings are frequently discovered during living kidney donor evaluation. Whereas most are asymptomatic or not clinically relevant, predonation screening could identify potentially life-threatening diseases at an earlier stage, allowing for a more radical treatment.

Liver Masses: What Physicians Need to Know About Ordering and Interpreting Liver Imaging

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This paper reviews diagnostic imaging techniques used to characterize liver masses and the imaging characteristics of the most common liver masses.

RECENT FINDINGS

The role of recently adopted ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents will be emphasized. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound is an inexpensive exam which can confirm benignity of certain liver masses without ionizing radiation. Magnetic resonance imaging using hepatocyte-specific gadolinium-based contrast agents can help confirm or narrow the differential diagnosis of liver masses.

Diagnostic value of computed tomography colonography (CTC) after incomplete optical colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated the role of computed tomography colonography (CTC) in patients who previously underwent incomplete optical colonoscopy (OC). We analyzed the impact of colonic lesions in intestinal segments not studied by OC and extracolonic findings in these patients.

METHODS

Between January 2014 and May 2015, 61 patients with a history of abdominal pain and incomplete OC examination were studied by CTC. CTCs were performed by 320-row CT scan in both the supine and the prone position, without intravenous administration of contrast medium. In all patients both colonic findings and extracolonic findings were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among the study group, 24 CTC examinations were negative for both colonic and extracolonic findings while 6 examinations revealed the presence of both colonic and extracolonic findings. In 24 patients CTC depicted colonic anomalies without extracolonic ones, while in 7 patients it showed extracolonic findings without colonic ones.

DISCUSSION

CTC is a noninvasive imaging technique with the advantages of high diagnostic performance, rapid data acquisition, minimal patient discomfort, lack of need for sedation, and virtually no recovery time. CTC accurately allows the evaluation of the nonvisualized part of the colon after incomplete OC and has the distinct advantage to detect clinically important extracolonic findings in patients with incomplete OC potentially explaining the patient's symptoms and conditioning their therapeutic management.

CONCLUSION

CTC accurately allows the assessment of both colonic and extracolonic pathologies representing a useful diagnostic tool in patients for whom complete OC is not achievable.

Consensus on the Prevention, Screening, Early Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal Tumors in China: Chinese Society of Gastroenterology, October 14-15, 2011, Shanghai, China

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is steadily increasing in China. Colorectal adenoma (CRA) is the most important precancerous disease of CRC. Screening for colorectal tumors can aid early diagnosis. Advances in endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection can aid the early treatment of colorectal tumors. Furthermore, because of high risk of recurrence after removal of adenomas under endoscopy, factors contributing to recurrence, the follow-up mode and the interval established, and the feasibility of application and the time of various chemical preventions should be concerned. However, a relevant consensus on the screening, early diagnosis and treatment, and prevention of colorectal tumors in China is lacking.

SUMMARY

The consensus recommendations include epidemiology, pathology, screening, early diagnosis, endoscopic treatment, monitoring and follow-up, and chemoprevention of colorectal tumors in China.

KEY MESSAGE

This is the first consensus on the prevention, screening, early diagnosis and treatment of CRA and CRC in China based on evidence in the literature and on local data.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Through reviewing the literature, regional data and passing the consensus by an anonymous vote, gastroenterology experts from all over China launch the consensus recommendations in Shanghai. The incidence and mortality of CRC in China has increased, and the incidence or detection rate of CRA has increased rapidly. Screening for colorectal tumors should be performed at age 50-74 years. Preliminary screening should be undertaken to find persons at high risk, followed by colonoscopy. A screening cycle of 3 years is recommended for persistent interventions. Opportunistic screening is a mode suitable for the current healthcare system and national situation. Colonoscopy combined with pathological examination is the standard method for the diagnosis of colorectal tumors. CRA removal under endoscopy can prevent CRC to some extent, but CRA has an obvious recurrence trend. The follow-up interval after the removal or surgery of colorectal tumors should be different with lesions. Primary prevention of CRA includes improved diet with more fiber, supplements containing calcium and vitamin D, supplements containing folic acid for those with low hemoglobin levels, and cessation of tobacco smoking. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors have been recognized to prevent recurrence after adenoma removal.

Extracolonic findings (ECF) on CT colonography (CTC) in patients presenting with colorectal symptoms

BACKGROUND

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is now an established method for imaging the colon and rectum in the screening and symptomatic setting. Additional benefit of CTC is the ability to assess for extracolonic findings especially in patients presenting with colorectal symptoms.

PURPOSE

To determine prevalence of extracolonic findings (ECF) in symptomatic patients undergoing CTC and determine accuracy of CTC for exclusion of significant abdominal disease and extracolonic malignancy (ECM).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 1359 unenhanced prone and postcontrast supine CTC studies were performed between March 2002 and December 2007. ECF were retrospectively classified according to C-RADS criteria into E1 to E4 findings. For ECM, a gold standard of clinical and/or radiological follow-up supplemented with data from the regional cancer registry with a median follow-up of 42 months was created. Sensitivity and negative predictive values for ECM was calculated.

RESULTS

Following exclusions, 1177 CTCs were analyzed. Of 1423 extracolonic findings reported, 328/1423 (23%) E3 and 100/1423 (7%) E4 (including six eventual FP studies) findings were identified. Thirty-two ECMs were confirmed following further investigations. Seven further small ECMs were detected during the entire follow-up, of which two were potentially visible in retrospect (false-negative studies). Additional tests were generated from 55/1177 (4.7%) studies. Sensitivity and negative predictive value for ECM was 94.1% (95% CI 78.9-98.9%) and 99.8% (95% CI 99.3-99.9%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

One in 37 patients were found to have an ECM. Two potentially detectable cancers were missed. Only a small proportion of patients underwent additional work-up.

The time has arrived for national reimbursement of screening CT colonography

OBJECTIVE

CT colonography (CTC) has been fully validated as an accurate screening test for colorectal carcinoma and is being disseminated globally. There is an abundance of new literature addressing the prior concerns of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Specific areas related to radiation dose, extracolonic findings, and generalizability of CTC to senior patients are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The time has arrived for national reimbursement of CTC in the United States.

Suspected extracolonic neoplasms detected on CT colonography: literature review and possible outcomes

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

This study summarizes the literature on the detection of cancer among indeterminate extracolonic findings on computed tomographic (CT) colonography in five targeted organs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed for English-language literature published between January 1, 1994, and December 31, 2010. We describe extracolonic findings in the kidney, lung, liver, pancreas, and ovary suspect for malignancy as they are associated with high mortality. For each organ, we calculated the median prevalence, positive predictive value (PPV), and false positive rate of malignancy and a pooled false-positive rate across studies.

RESULTS

Of 91 publications initially identified, 24 were eligible for review. Indeterminate renal masses on CT colonography had 20.5% median PPV and low pooled false positive rate of 1.3% (95% confidence interval 0.6-2.0). In contrast, indeterminate masses of the lung, liver, pancreas, and ovary had low PPV (median values ranged from 0% to 3.8%). Indeterminate masses of the ovary resulted in the highest pooled false-positive rate of 2.2%. Results were similar in studies of both screening and nonscreening populations. We estimated the probability of false positive results through the detection of significant extracolonic findings as 46 per 1000 for men and 68 per 1000 for women.

CONCLUSIONS

Indeterminate renal masses newly detected on CT colonography have an estimated one in five chance of malignancy and therefore warrant further follow-up to provide a definitive diagnosis. Conversely, indeterminate masses of the lung, liver, pancreas, and ovary are associated with high false positive rates and merit more conservative clinical follow-up.

Virtual colonoscopy: Utility, impact and overview

Computed tomography (CT) colonoscopy is a well-established technique for evaluation of colorectal cancer. Significant advances have been made in the technique of CT colonoscopy since its inception. Excellent results can be achieved in detecting both colorectal cancer and significant sized polyps as long as a meticulous technique is adopted while performing CT colonoscopy. Furthermore, it is important to realize that there is a learning curve involved in interpreting these studies and adequate experience is essential to achieve high sensitivity and specificity with this technique. Indications, contraindications, technique and interpretation, including potential pitfalls in CT colonoscopy imaging, are reviewed in this article. Recent advances and the current role of CT colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening are also discussed.

Extracolonic findings on CT colonography increases yield of colorectal cancer screening

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of extracolonic findings when screening is undertaken by CT colonography (CTC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients completing a screening CTC from August 2003 to June 2006 at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Extracolonic findings were categorized using a CTC reporting and data system that classifies findings as highly significant, likely significant, and insignificant. All final diagnoses, surgeries, malignancies, and costs of diagnostic radiology procedures were calculated for each category.

RESULTS

Of 2,277 patients (mean +/- SD age, 59 +/- 11 years; 60% white; 56% male) undergoing CTC, extracolonic findings were identified in 1,037 (46%) patients, with 787 (34.5%) insignificant and 240 (11.0%) significant findings. Evaluation of significant findings generated 280 radiology procedures and 19 surgeries over a mean follow-up time of 19 +/- 10 months. The total cost of the radiology studies was $113,179; the studies added approximately $50 extra per patient. Seven high-risk lesions were identified (six extracolonic malignancies and one large aortic aneurysm) in patients with significant findings. CTC also identified six intracolonic malignancies and three adenomas with high-grade dysplasia. When considering extracolonic findings, CTC increased the odds of identifying high-risk lesions by 78% (nine intracolonic lesions vs 16 intracolonic plus extracolonic lesions; p = 0.0156). Of the 16 intracolonic and extracolonic high-risk lesions, 11 (69%) underwent curative resection, and 5 of 11 (44.4%) were extracolonic.

CONCLUSION

CTC increased the odds of identifying high-risk lesions by 78%. CTC should be considered as an alternative to optical colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening or as a onetime procedure to identify significant treatable intracolonic and extracolonic lesions.

Extracolonic findings at CT colonography

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a validated tool for the evaluation of the colon for polyps and cancer. The technique employed for CTC includes a low-dose CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis that is typically performed without the administration of intravenous contrast. Using this technique it is possible to discover findings outside of the colon. By far, most extracolonic findings are determined to be clinically inconsequential on CTC and most patients are not recommended for further testing. However, some findings may result in additional diagnostic evaluation or intervention, which can lead to patient anxiety and increased morbidity and health care costs. Alternatively, some findings can lead to the earlier diagnosis of a clinically significant lesion, which could result in decreased patient morbidity and mortality as well as overall savings in downstream health care costs. The controversies of detecting and evaluating these incidental extracolonic findings on CTC are discussed.

Computed tomographic colonography: Hope or hype?

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a promising emerging technology for imaging of the colon. This concise review discusses the currently available data on CTC technique, test characteristics, acceptance, safety, cost-effectiveness, follow-up strategy, and extracolonic findings. In summary, CTC technique is still evolving, and further research is needed to clarify the role of automated colonic insufflation, smooth-muscle relaxants, intravenous and oral contrast, software rendering, and patient positioning. Currently, full bowel preparation is still required to achieve optimal results. The sensitivity for detecting large polyps (> 1 cm) can be as high as 85%, with specificity of up to 97%. These test characteristics are almost comparable to those of conventional colonoscopy. Patient acceptance of CTC is generally higher than that for colonoscopy, especially in patients who have never undergone either procedure. CTC is generally safe, although uncommon instances of colonic perforation have been documented. In terms of cost-effectiveness, most decision analyses have concluded that CTC would only be cost-effective if it were considerably cheaper than conventional colonoscopy. The proper follow-up strategy for small polyps or incidental extracolonic findings discovered during CTC is still under debate. At present, the exact clinical role of virtual colonoscopy still awaits determination. Even though widespread CTC screening is not available today, in the future there may eventually be a role for this technology. Technological advances in this area will undoubtedly continue, with multi-detector row CT scanners allowing thinner collimation and higher resolution images. Stool-tagging techniques are likely to evolve and may eventually allow for low-preparation CTC. Perceptual and fatigue-related reading errors can potentially be minimized with the help of computer-aided detection software. Further research will define the exact role of this promising technology in our diagnostic armamentarium.

CT colonography: coming of age

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to highlight key issues in CT colonography (CTC) for radiologists so they can represent the technology accurately to referring physicians and provide a perspective that will hopefully augment best care for their patients.

CONCLUSION

With publication of the National CT Colonography Trial and the endorsement of CTC for screening by a multisociety task force that included the American Cancer Society, American College of Radiology, and U.S. Multisociety Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, the clinical validation of CTC has been completed, and CTC is now ready for widespread clinical application. Radiologists must be skilled in CTC and knowledgeable about colorectal cancer screening issues.

Gastroenterologists' interpretation of CTC: a pilot study demonstrating feasibility and similar accuracy compared with radiologists' interpretation

OBJECTIVES

Computed tomography colonography (CTC) is an emerging colon cancer screening modality that has the potential to increase adherence to current screening recommendations. Traditionally, the interpretation of CTC has been limited to radiologists. As the technology of CTC has developed, three-dimensional endoluminal fly-through images have largely replaced two-dimensional CT images as the primary reading modality. Such a display is a realistic corollary to the endoscopic view obtained during colonoscopy. Our study sought to determine whether gastroenterologists could interpret the colonic display of CTC with an accuracy similar to that of trained radiologists.

METHODS

Three board-certified gastroenterologists and four gastroenterology fellows in various stages of training interpreted a mean of 45 CTCs (range: 30-50) in which colonoscopy had also been performed. Before reading any cases, each reader underwent CTC interpretation training with an experienced CTC radiologist. After interpreting each CTC, the gastroenterologist had access to both the original radiology interpretation of the CTC and the corresponding colonoscopy results. Outcomes included accuracy of the gastroenterologists' interpretation, time required for CTC interpretation, evidence of learning, and the level of diagnostic agreement between gastroenterologists and radiologists.

RESULTS

Gastroenterologist readers identified polyps >or=6 mm on CTC with a mean sensitivity and specificity of 83.5% (67-100%) and 78.8% (69-100%), respectively. Corresponding values for polyps >or=8 mm were 83.8% (68-100%) and 74% (30-93%), respectively, and those for polyps >or=10 mm were 87.8% (67-100%) and 85.2% (60-94%), respectively. Overall, 83% (5 of 6) of gastroenterologists achieved kappa scores >or=0.60, suggesting good agreement with radiologists; 66% achieved kappa>or=0.75. There was a direct relationship between diagnostic accuracy and level of gastroenterology training, with third-year fellows being nearly as accurate as the attendings. The average gastroenterologist CTC reading time was 18.4 min (range: 11.2-25.6).

CONCLUSIONS

The gastroenterologists in this study were able to read CTCs with an accuracy that approaches that of radiologists. The level of training affected the accuracy of CTC interpretation by the gastroenterologist. Average gastroenterologist CTC interpretation times in this study were similar to recommended colonoscopy times. Further studies are warranted to determine whether gastroenterologists are able to interpret CTCs independently in clinical practice.

Extracolonic findings of computed tomographic colonography in Koreans

AIM: To determine the frequency and characteristics of extracolonic lesions detected using computed tomographic (CT) colonography.

METHODS: The significance of extracolonic lesions was classified as high, intermediate, or low. Medical records were reviewed to establish whether further investigations were carried out pertaining to the extracolonic lesions that were detected by CT colonography.

RESULTS: A total of 920 cases from 7 university hospitals were included, and 692 extracolonic findings were found in 532 (57.8%) patients. Of 692 extracolonic findings, 60 lesions (8.7%) were highly significant, 250 (36.1%) were of intermediate significance, and 382 (55.2%) were of low significance. CT colonography revealed fewer extracolonic findings in subjects who were without symptoms (P < 0.001), younger (P < 0.001), or who underwent CT colonography with no contrast enhancement (P = 0.005). CT colonography with contrast enhancement showed higher cost-effectiveness in detecting highly significant extracolonic lesions in older subjects and in subjects with symptoms.

CONCLUSION: Most of the extracolonic findings detected using CT colonography were of less significant lesions. The role of CT colonography would be optimized if this procedure was performed with contrast enhancement in symptomatic older subjects.

Extracolonic findings at virtual colonoscopy: an important consideration in asymptomatic colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Virtual colonoscopy has been evaluated for use as a colorectal cancer screening tool, and in prior studies, it has been estimated that the evaluation of extra-colonic findings adds $28-$34 per patient studied.

METHODS

As an ancillary study to a prospective cohort study comparing virtual colonoscopy to conventional colonoscopy for colorectal cancer detection, the investigators retrospectively determined the number and estimated costs of all clinic visits, imaging and laboratory studies, and medical procedures that were generated as a direct result of extra-colonic findings at virtual colonoscopy.

RESULTS

We enrolled 143 subjects who underwent CTC followed by conventional colonoscopy. Data were available for 136 subjects, and 134 (98%) had at least one extra-colonic finding on CT. Evaluation of extra-colonic findings was performed in 32 subjects (24%). These subjects underwent 73 imaging studies, 30 laboratory studies, 44 clinic visits, 6 medical procedures, and 44 new or return outpatient visits over a mean of 38 months following the CTC. The most common findings causing further evaluation were lung nodules and indeterminate kidney lesions. No extra-colonic malignancies were found in this study. A total of $33,690 was spent in evaluating extra-colonic findings, which is $248 per patient enrolled.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost of the evaluation of extra-colonic findings following virtual colonoscopy may be much higher in actual practice than is suggested by prior studies. This will impact the cost-effectiveness of using virtual colonoscopy for asymptomatic colorectal cancer screening and underscores the importance of standardizing the reporting of extra-colonic findings to encourage appropriate follow-up.

Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers

BACKGROUND

Computed tomographic (CT) colonography is a noninvasive option in screening for colorectal cancer. However, its accuracy as a screening tool in asymptomatic adults has not been well defined.

METHODS

We recruited 2600 asymptomatic study participants, 50 years of age or older, at 15 study centers. CT colonographic images were acquired with the use of standard bowel preparation, stool and fluid tagging, mechanical insufflation, and multidetector-row CT scanners (with 16 or more rows). Radiologists trained in CT colonography reported all lesions measuring 5 mm or more in diameter. Optical colonoscopy and histologic review were performed according to established clinical protocols at each center and served as the reference standard. The primary end point was detection by CT colonography of histologically confirmed large adenomas and adenocarcinomas (10 mm in diameter or larger) that had been detected by colonoscopy; detection of smaller colorectal lesions (6 to 9 mm in diameter) was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Complete data were available for 2531 participants (97%). For large adenomas and cancers, the mean (+/-SE) per-patient estimates of the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve for CT colonography were 0.90+/-0.03, 0.86+/-0.02, 0.23+/-0.02, 0.99+/-<0.01, and 0.89+/-0.02, respectively. The sensitivity of 0.90 (i.e., 90%) indicates that CT colonography failed to detect a lesion measuring 10 mm or more in diameter in 10% of patients. The per-polyp sensitivity for large adenomas or cancers was 0.84+/-0.04. The per-patient sensitivity for detecting adenomas that were 6 mm or more in diameter was 0.78.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of asymptomatic adults, CT colonographic screening identified 90% of subjects with adenomas or cancers measuring 10 mm or more in diameter. These findings augment published data on the role of CT colonography in screening patients with an average risk of colorectal cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00084929; American College of Radiology Imaging Network [ACRIN] number, 6664.)

Computed tomography colonography (virtual colonoscopy): climax of a new era of validation and transition into community practice

Colorectal cancer, which kills more than 50,000 patients every year in the United States and costs more than $6 billion in direct health costs, is a prime target for cancer prevention. Computed tomography colonography (CTC) has emerged as a minimally invasive, structural examination of the entire colon that can complement the current tools of cancer prevention and may improve patient compliance. Large trials have suggested a sensitivity of roughly 90% and specificity greater than 97% for CTC for patients with polyps >or= 10 mm. Bowel preparation by diet restriction, catharsis, and stool and fluid tagging are typically used. A prepless CTC protocol is an active area of research with a focus on improving patient compliance. Insurance coverage of CTC is a key factor affecting current dissemination and local and national coverage decisions are ongoing. CT examination of the abdomen allows visualization of extracolonic organs, where detection of additional disease must balance any unnecessary anxiety and testing. Estimates of CTC cost-effectiveness are generally favorable, but vary due to the high sensitivity of these models to costs, polyp sensitivity, compliance rates, and other parameters, which are difficult to accurately assess. Quality initiatives are being developed that will be key for implementation into community practice.

Computed tomographic colonography: clinical value

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) has the potential to reliably detect polyps in the colon. Its clinical value is accepted for several indications. The main target is screening asymptomatic people for colorectal cancer (CRC). As in large multi-centre trials controversial results were obtained, acceptance of this indication on a large scale is still pending. Agreement exists that in experienced hands screening can be performed with CTC. This emphasizes the importance of adequate and intensive training. Besides this, other problems have to be solved. A low complication profile is mandatory. Perforation rate is very low. Ultra-low dose radiation should be used. When screening large patient cohorts, CTC will need a time-efficient and cost-effective management without too many false positives and additional exploration. Can therefore a cut-off size of polyp detection safely be installed? Is the flat lesion an issue? Can extra-colonic findings be treated efficiently? A positive relationship with the gastro-enterologists will improve the act of screening. Improvements of scanning technique and software with dose reduction, improved 3D visualisation methods and CAD are steps in the good direction. Finally, optimisation of laxative-free CTC could be invaluable in the development of CTC as a screening tool for CRC.

CT colonography: current status and future promise

CT colonography (CTC) is an innovative technology that entails CT examination of the entire colon and computerized processing of the raw data after colon cleansing and colonic distention. CTC could potentially increase the screening rate for colon cancer because of its relative safety, relatively low expense, and greater patient acceptance, but its role in mass colon cancer screening is controversial because of its highly variable sensitivity, the inability to sample polyps for histologic analysis, and lack of therapeutic capabilities. This article reviews the CTC literature, including imaging and adjunctive techniques, radiologic interpretation, procedure indications, contraindications, risks, sensitivity, interpretation pitfalls, and controversies.

Computed tomography colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps

OBJECTIVE

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography colonography (CTC) compared with conventional colonoscopy (CC).

METHODS

Patients with an indication of CC were included. Fifty patients underwent CTC using multidetector CT before diagnostic colonoscopy was performed by an expert colonoscopist. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed individually both for each polyp and for each patient.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were included and 40 polyps were analyzed. The by-polyp sensitivity of CTC was 15% for polyps 5 mm or less, 75% for polyps 5- 10 mm and 75% for polyps 10 mm or larger. By-patient specificity was 6% for polyps 5 mm or less, 75% for polyps 5-10 mm and 80% for polyps 10 mm or larger. The specificity of CTC was 94%. CTC was preferred over CC by 90% of the patients. The mean colonoscopy examination time was 30 minutes for CC and 35 minutes for CTC (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity of CTC is moderate in detecting polyps larger than 10 mm, low in detecting 5-10 mm polyps and very low in detecting those less than 5 mm. The overall specificity of the procedure was 94%. Procedure time was lower with CC than with CTC but the latter was better tolerated by most patients.

Utility of computed tomographic colonography in surveillance for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is suggested to be an alternative to colonoscopy as a surveillance tool in subjects with a high risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). To evaluate the utility of CTC we successively examined 78 subjects, all with a DNA mismatch repair gene mutation, by CTC and colonoscopy. We detected altogether 37 polyps or tumors in 28 subjects (prevalence 35.9%), adenomas in 13 subjects (16.7%), CRC in two (2.6%), and hyperplastic polyps in 13 (16.7%). A great majority of the polyps were diminutive. The per-patient sensitivity for detecting all lesions with CTC was 0.25 and 0.29 by two radiologists and the specificities 0.82 and 0.76. For lesions of 10 mm or larger the sensitivities were 0.6 and 1.0 and the specificities 0.96 by each examiner. Each diagnosed the two cancers correctly. We concluded that CTC has an acceptable accuracy for large lesions in the colon but the detection rate for small polyps is not comparable to that in colonoscopy. Therefore CTC remains a second choice in surveillance for use when colonoscopy for some reason is incomplete or unsuitable.

The evolving role of CT colonography

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is widely recommended as part of standard preventive care. All average risk persons over the age of 50 y are eligible. Various authorities have advocated fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, barium enema and colonoscopy at varying intervals as acceptable screening options. Despite the array of choices, CRC screening lags in frequency behind other cancer screening maneuvers like mammography or Pap smear. Of late, there is growing interest in CT colonography (CTC) as another screening option. CTC, or virtual colonoscopy, may represent an attractive, non-invasive method of CRC screening that provides images akin to traditional colonoscopy. Improvements in CTC performance, especially when coupled with declining costs, suggest that CTC's role in average risk screening will increase in the future. This review summarizes available data about the efficacy of CTC in average and high risk screening populations. Current indications as well as limitations to this technology are discussed, as are practical issues like the cost-effectiveness of CTC for widespread use.

Economic and ethical impact of extrarenal findings on potential living kidney donor assessment with computed tomography angiography

To determine the prevalence and spectrum of extrarenal findings in a screening population of potential living kidney donors undergoing renal Computed tomography angiography (CTA) and evaluate their impact on subsequent patient management and imaging costs. Two radiologists retrospectively reviewed 175 consecutive renal CTA's performed for assessment of potential living kidney donors. Extrarenal radiological findings were recorded and classified according to high, medium, or low importance based on clinical relevance and the need for further investigations and/or treatment. The cost of additional imaging examinations was calculated using 2002 Canadian (British Columbia) reimbursements. There were 73 extrarenal findings in 71/175 (40.6%) of the potential kidney donors in the study population. Findings were categorized as of high clinical importance in 18 (10.3%) cases, including lung lesions, bowel tumors, and liver tumors and as medium importance in 31 (17.7%). Twenty-two (12.6%) individuals had findings categorized as low importance, probably of no clinical significance and requiring no follow-up. Further potential evaluation of the 49 patients (28%) with highly and moderately significant extrarenal findings may require an additional $6137 (mean $35.1 per each case of all the screened patients). Transplantation of a kidney from a living donor is an excellent alternative to cadaveric allografts. Potential living kidney donors are a highly selected population of healthy individuals, screened for significant past or current medical conditions before undergoing CTA. Despite this screening, potentially significant extrarenal findings (classified as high or medium importance) were revealed in 28% of patients. These patients may require further investigations and/or treatment. The referring physician and patient should be aware of such potentially high probability, which may require further nontransplant related evaluation and treatment. This has medical, legal, economic, and ethical implications.

Virtual Colonoscopy: Technique and Accuracy

Virtual colonoscopy (VC) has acquired an important role in evaluation of the colon. In some situations it may be a safer method to visualize the colon effectively, or it may be the only available option when other techniques have failed. This article reviews state-of-the art VC technique and the results of current performance trials. It discusses the rationale for using various colonic cleansing regimens for VC. It also discusses the two distending agents for VC (room air and carbon dioxide) and presents practical tips for administration and the role of antispasmodic drugs.

Polyethylene glycol solution (PEG) plus contrast medium vs PEG alone preparation for CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy in preoperative colorectal cancer staging

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the usefulness of combined polyethylene glycol solution plus contrast medium bowel preparation (PEG-C preparation) followed by dual-contrast computed tomography enema (DCCTE) and conventional colonoscopy. The main purpose of these examinations is the preoperative staging of already known tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred patients with colorectal tumors were alternately allocated to either a polyethylene glycol solution preparation (PEG preparation) group (n=50) or a PEG-C preparation group (n=50) before undergoing conventional colonoscopy and computed tomographic (CT) colonography. After conventional colonoscopy, multidetector row CT scans were performed. Air images were reconstructed for both groups; contrast medium images were additionally reconstructed for the PEG-C preparation group. DCCTE images were a composite of air images and contrast medium images without use of dedicated electronic cleansing software. Quality scores (the presence or absence of blind spots of the colon) were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Complete tumor images were obtained by DCCTE for all 50 (100%) lesions in the PEG-C preparation group, as compared with only nine of the 50 lesions (18%) in the PEG preparation group (air-contrast CT enema). The overall quality score in the PEG-C preparation group was significantly better than that in the PEG preparation group (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

DCCTE showed the entire colon without blind spots in nearly all patients in the PEG-C preparation group because the areas under residual fluid were reconstructed as contrast medium images. DCCTE and conventional colonoscopy after PEG-C preparation are feasible and safe procedures that can be used for preoperative evaluation in patients with colorectal cancer.

Will screening colonoscopy disappear and transform gastroenterology practice? Threats to clinical practice and recommendations to reduce their impact: report of a consensus conference conducted by the AGA Institute Future Trends Committee

The AGA Institute Future Trends Committee (FTC) developed this report based on a consensus conference it convened on April 1-2, 2006, in Washington, DC. The report was prepared for the FTC by Carol Regueiro, MD, a medical writer under contract to the AGA Institute, and Michael Stolar, PhD, staff liaison to the FTC. It was approved by the FTC on July 12, 2006, and accepted by the AGA Institute Governing Board on July 22, 2006. This report reflects the panel's assessment of information available at the time of the conference. Readers should view this report in the context of data that will continue to accumulate and facts that may change after its creation.

Minimal preparation CT for the diagnosis of suspected colorectal cancer in the frail and elderly patient

Colorectal cancer is a common malignancy with an increased incidence in the elderly population. Traditional methods of evaluating this disease have included double contrast barium enema and colonoscopy. Unfortunately, in the frail and elderly patient, these investigations can be difficult to perform and are often not tolerated. Minimal preparation computed tomography (MPCT) of the colon has been suggested as an alternative in this patient population. In this technique, no bowel preparation is used apart from the administration of oral contrast medium. The patient is imaged only in the supine position, without per rectal insufflation of gas or barium. This article reviews the experience to date of MPCT in detecting colonic tumours, and compares its efficacy to the traditional methods. A meta-analysis of the studies allowed estimation of the pooled sensitivity of MPCT to be 83% (95% confidence interval: 76-89%), and pooled specificity to be 90% (95% CI: 85-94%). An added advantage of MPCT is the ability to identify extra-colonic pathology, and this aspect is also reviewed. In addition, the common radiological features and pitfalls in identifying colonic tumours by MPCT are discussed.

Computed tomographic colonography: prevalence, nature, and clinical significance of extracolonic findings in a community screening program

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal neoplasia screening by computed tomographic colonography (CTC) may lead to the detection of incidental extracolonic findings. We report the prevalence and clinical significance of extracolonic pathology found within a community-based CTC screening program and the cost of clinical follow-up and further investigation of these findings.

METHODS

A total of 432 asymptomatic subjects at an average risk of colorectal neoplasia, aged 50-69, had screening by CTC using a low radiation dose protocol. Axial images were prospectively examined for extracolonic lesions and those considered clinically relevant were followed up. All clinic visits and further investigations were tallied to calculate the incremental cost to the screening CTC.

RESULTS

A total of 146 extracolonic lesions were detected in 118 (27.3%) subjects. Thirty-two (7.4%) subjects had clinically relevant extracolonic abnormalities and nine (2.1%) subjects may derive a clinical benefit from the detection of these lesions. A single CTC costed $171.12, and following up extracolonic findings resulted in an additional $24.37 (14.2%) per CTC. Limiting reporting to the aorta and kidneys would have reduced the number of subjects requiring follow-up to 14 (3.2%), and decreased the cost increment to 4.7% without detriment to clinical outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Extracolonic findings of screening CTC are common, but infrequent of clinical importance. The additional burden of following up these findings was modest and could have been further reduced if clear clinical and radiological criteria and pathways for their further investigation were defined.

CT colonography: where have we been and where are we going?

Over the past decade, computed tomographic (CT) colonography (also known as virtual colonoscopy) has been used to investigate the colon for colorectal neoplasia. Numerous clinical and technical advances have allowed CT colonography to advance slowly from a research tool to a viable option for colorectal cancer screening. However, substantial controversy remains among radiologists, gastroenterologists, and other clinicians with regard to the current role of CT colonography in clinical practice. On the one hand, all agree there is much excitement about a noninvasive imaging examination that can reliably depict clinically important colorectal lesions. However, this is tempered by results from several recent studies that show the sensitivity of CT colonography may not be as great when performed and the images interpreted by radiologists without expertise and training. The potential to miss important lesions exists; moreover, if polyps cannot be differentiated from folds and residual fecal matter, unnecessary colonoscopy will be performed. In this review, current issues will be discussed regarding colon cancer and the established and reimbursed strategies to screen for it and the past, current, and potential future role of CT colonography.

Extracolonic findings at CT colonography

This review focuses on the detection of extracolonic findings at CT colonography (CTC). Since its introduction, it has been regarded as a promising alternative to conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps and cancers. Unlike conventional colonoscopy and barium enema, CTC allows evaluation not only of the colon but also visualization of the lung bases, the abdomen, and the pelvis. CTC is performed with thin sections (1-5 mm) and small intervals (0.5-2 mm), enabling superb image reconstruction. The ability to evaluate the extracolonic structures can present a clinical dilemma. On the one hand, CTC may incidentally demonstrate asymptomatic malignant diseases or other clinically important conditions, thus possibly reducing morbidity or mortality. On the other hand, CTC may reveal numerous findings of no clinical relevance; this could result in costly additional diagnostic examinations with an increase in morbidity and overall negative impact on patients' health. In this article, extracolonic findings at CTC will be reviewed and the potential benefits and disadvantages will be presented.

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.