CT and MR colonography: scanning techniques, postprocessing, and emphasis on polyp detection

Advanced 3D Visualization and 3D Printing in Radiology

Since the discovery of X-rays in 1895, medical imaging systems have played a crucial role in medicine by permitting the visualization of internal structures and understanding the function of organ systems. Traditional imaging modalities including Computed Tomography (CT), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Ultrasound (US) present fixed two-dimensional (2D) images which are difficult to conceptualize complex anatomy. Advanced volumetric medical imaging allows for three-dimensional (3D) image post-processing and image segmentation to be performed, enabling the creation of 3D volume renderings and enhanced visualization of pertinent anatomic structures in 3D. Furthermore, 3D imaging is used to generate 3D printed models and extended reality (augmented reality and virtual reality) models. A 3D image translates medical imaging information into a visual story rendering complex data and abstract ideas into an easily understood and tangible concept. Clinicians use 3D models to comprehend complex anatomical structures and to plan and guide surgical interventions more precisely. This chapter will review the volumetric radiological techniques that are commonly utilized for advanced 3D visualization. It will also provide examples of 3D printing and extended reality technology applications in radiology and describe the positive impact of advanced radiological image visualization on patient care.

Radiologic Imaging Modalities for Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Studies reported various diagnostic value of radiologic imaging modalities for diagnosis and management of colorectal cancer (CRC).

AIMS

To summary the diagnosis and management of CRC using computed tomography colonography (CTC), magnetic resonance colonography (MRC), and positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT).

METHODS

Comprehensive literature searches were conducted in PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane library for studies published before April 2021. The diagnostic performance of CTC, MRC, and PET/CT for CRC was summarized.

RESULTS

A total of 54 studies (17 studies for CTC, 8 studies for MRC, and 29 studies for PET/CT) were selected for final analysis. The sensitivity and specificity for CTC ranged from 27 to 100%, 88 to 100%, respectively, and the pooled sensitivity and specificity for CTC were 0.97 (95% CI 0.88-0.99) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.99-1.00). The sensitivity and specificity for MRC ranged from 48 to 100%, 60 to 100%, respectively, and the pooled sensitivity and specificity for MRC were 0.98 (95% C: 0.77-1.00) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.84-0.98). The sensitivity and specificity for PET/CT ranged from 84 to 100%, 33 to 100%, respectively, and the pooled sensitivity and specificity for PET/CT were 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.96) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.90-0.97). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for CTC, MRC, and PET/CT was 1.00 (95% CI 0.99-1.00), 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00), and 0.97 (0.95% CI 0.95-0.98), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggested both CTC and MRC with relative higher diagnostic value for diagnosing CRC, while PET/CT with higher diagnostic value in detecting local recurrence for patients with CRC.

Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance versus computed tomography colonography for colorectal cancer: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Advanced colorectal cancers were associated with poor prognosis, and early diagnosis was important for high-risk patients. Colonography is commonly used for diagnosing colorectal cancer. However, a few studies reported the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) versus computed tomography colonography (CTC). This study aimed to compare the diagnostic value of MRC versus CTC for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Twenty-three studies on the diagnosis of colorectal cancer using MRC or CTC were obtained from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases until July 2017. The ratios of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were calculated to compare the diagnostic value of MRC versus CTC.

RESULTS

The summary sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, and area under the ROC for MRC were 0.97 (0.81-1.00), 0.92 (0.80-0.97), 11.71 (4.46-30.73), 0.03 (0.00-0.24), and 0.98 (0.97-0.99), respectively, for diagnosing colorectal cancer. The pooled estimates for CTC in diagnosing colorectal cancer were as follows: sensitivity, 0.96 (0.90-0.98); specificity, 1.00 (0.99-1.00); PLR, 197.32 (73.21-531.85); NLR, 0.04 (0.02-0.11); and area under the ROC, 1.00 (0.99-1.00). No significant differences were found between MRC and CTC for sensitivity, specificity, and NLR. MRC was associated with lower PLR and area under the ROC for diagnosing colorectal cancer compared with CTC.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated MRC and CTC as potential diagnostic approaches for colorectal cancer. CTC had a higher diagnostic value of PLR and area under the ROC for colorectal cancer.

Bimodal visualization of colorectal uptake of nanoparticles in dimethylhydrazine-treated mice

AIM: To investigate colorectal uptake of solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs) in mice receiving different doses of 1,2-dimethylhydrazine (DMH) using magnetic resonance (MR) and laser-scanning confocal fluorescence microscope (LSCFM) imaging.

METHODS: Eight mice were sacrificed in a pilot study to establish the experimental protocol and to visualize colorectal uptake of SLNs in normal mice. Gadopentetate dimeglumine and fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-loaded SLN (Gd-FITC-SLN) enemas were performed on mice receiving DMH for 10 wk (group 1, n = 9) or 16 wk (group 2, n = 7) and FITC-SLN enema was performed on 4 DMH-treated mice (group 3). Pre- and post-enema MR examinations were made to visualize the air-inflated distal colorectum. Histological and LSCFM examinations were performed to verify colorectal malignancy and to track the distribution of SLNs.

RESULTS: Homogeneous enhancement and dense fluorescence (FITC) deposition in colorectal wall were observed in normal mice and 1 DMH-treated mouse (group 1) on fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) and LSCFM images, respectively. Heterogeneous mural enhancement was found in 6 mice (4 in group 1; 2 in group 2). No visible mural enhancement was observed in the other mice. LSCFM imaging revealed linear fluorescence deposition along the colorectal mucosa in all groups. Nine intraluminal masses and one prolapsed mass were detected by MR imaging with different enhancement modes and pathologies. Interstitial FITC deposition was identified where obvious enhancement was observed in FLAIR images. Bladder imaging agent accumulations were observed in 11 of 16 DMH-treated mice of groups 1 and 2.

CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in colorectal uptake and distribution of SLNs between normal and DMH-treated mice, which may provide a new mechanism of contrast for MR colonography.

CT colonography in detection of colorectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic methods used in screening and detecting colorectal carcinoma are digitorectal examination, faecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, DNA stool analysis, barium enema, colonoscopy, and as of recently CT colonography. The aim of this study was to establish diagnostic accuracy and comfort of CT colonography compared to colonoscopy and barium enema.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included 231 patients in the prospective study. For all patients CT colonography and barium enema followed by colonoscopy were performed. After the procedures a comfort assessment was done in all patients. Diagnostic positive results were verified by the pato-histological examination. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predicative value (PPV) and negative predicative value (NPV) were calculated for each procedure.

RESULTS

With CT colonography, barium enema and colonoscopy 95 lesions were found, 56 (59%) of them were tumours and 39 (41%) were polyps. Among polyps pato-histology revealed 34 adenomas, 3 tubulovillous adenomas and 2 lipomas, among tumours there were 55 adenocarcinomas and 1 lymphoma. Results showed CT colonography sensitivity to polyps to be 89.7%, barium enema 48.7%, and colonoscopy 94.9%. Sensitivity to tumours of CT colonography and colonoscopy was 100% and of barium enema 94.6%. Specificities and PPV were 100% in all procedures. The comfort assessment showed CT colonography as the far most comfortable out of three procedures.

New serological biomarkers of inflammatory bowel disease

Serological biomarkers in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are a rapidly expanding list of non-invasive tests for objective assessments of disease activity, early diagnosis, prognosis evaluation and surveillance. This review summarizes both old and new biomarkers in IBD, but focuses on the development and characterization of new serological biomarkers (identified since 2007). These include five new anti-glycan antibodies, anti-chitobioside IgA (ACCA), anti-laminaribioside IgG (ALCA), anti-manobioside IgG (AMCA), and antibodies against chemically synthesized (Σ) two major oligomannose epitopes, Man α-1,3 Man α-1,2 Man (ΣMan3) and Man α-1,3 Man α-1,2 Man α-1,2 Man (ΣMan4). These new biomarkers serve as valuable complementary tools to existing biomarkers not only in differentiating Crohn’s disease (CD), ulcerative colitis (UC), normal and other non-IBD gut diseases, but also in predicting disease involvement (ileum vs colon), IBD risk (as subclinical biomarkers), and disease course (risk of complication and surgery). Interestingly, the prevalence of the antiglycan antibodies, including anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibodies (ASCA), ALCA and AMCA, was found to be associated with single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of IBD susceptible genes such as NOD2/CARD15, NOD1/CARD4, toll-like receptors (TLR) 2 and 4, and β-defensin-1. Furthermore, a gene dosage effect was observed: anti-glycan positivity became more frequent as the number of NOD2/CARD15 SNPS increased. Other new serum/plasma IBD biomarkers reviewed include ubiquitination factor E4A (UBE4A), CXCL16 (a chemokine), resistin, and apolipoprotein A-IV. This review also discusses the most recent studies in IBD biomarker discovery by the application of new technologies such as proteomics, fourier transform near-infrared spectroscopy, and multiplex enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)’s (with an emphasis on cytokine/chemokine profiling). Finally, the prospects of developing more clinically useful novel diagnostic algorithms by incorporating new technologies in serological biomarker profiling and integrating multiple biomarkers with bioinformatics analysis/modeling are also discussed.

MR colonography: 1.5T versus 3T

MR colonography is a powerful noninvasive method to image colorectal masses and inflammatory bowel disease. This article describes current techniques of MR colonography and compares its implementation at 1.5T and 3T.

MR colonography

Combining the advantages of unsurpassed soft tissue contrast and lack of ionizing radiation, MR imaging of the gastrointestinal tract has become increasingly used clinically. Both bowel inflammation and tumor disease of the large bowel can be well visualized by means of MR colonography (MRC). This article describes current techniques of MRC and gives an overview of its clinical outcome. Special focus is directed toward the evaluation of patients' acceptance of MRC.

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.

Air-inflated magnetic resonance colonography in patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopy: Comparison with intraoperative findings, pathology specimens, and follow-up conventional colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

To assess the usefulness of air-inflated magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) in patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopy (CC).

METHODS

From September 2001 to December 2004, 51 patients (25 male and 26 female, age range 32 to 85 years) with incomplete colonoscopy were recruited to have MRC performed. Half-fourier single short turbo spin echo (HASTE) axial, coronal, and three dimensional fat suppressed gradient echo sequence (VIBE) coronal images in both the prone and supine positions were performed for each patient. MRC was reviewed by two radiologists for detection of synchronous colonic lesion. The location and size of lesions were recorded and were compared with the findings of CC. Patients were managed according to the clinical situation and intraoperative findings were compared with MRC findings. Follow-up colonoscopy was performed in 29 patients. The follow-up colonoscopy findings were then compared with the MRC findings.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients had incomplete colonoscopy because of an obstructing tumor. The other seven patients had incomplete colonoscopy because of excessive bowel looping. Apart from one patient suffering from chronic obstructive airway disease with resulting nondiagnostic MRC, all other patients had MRC successfully performed. Each colon was divided into six bowel segments for analysis. All 300 segments were of diagnostic quality and were assessed by the MRC. MRC correctly identified all 44 obstructing tumors demonstrated by initial CC. Synchronous tumors in proximal colonic segments were identified in two patients by MRC. In addition, MRC identified two colonic tumors located in bowel segments inaccessible by CC because of excessive looping.

CONCLUSIONS

MRC is useful for detection of colonic pathology and assessment of proximal colon in patients with colonic cancer after incomplete colonoscopy.

CT colonography in the detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: systematic review, meta-analysis, and proposed minimum data set for study level reporting

PURPOSE

To assess the methodologic quality of available data in published reports of computed tomographic (CT) colonography by performing systematic review and meta-analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The MEDLINE database was searched for colonography reports published between 1994 and 2003, without language restriction. The terms colonography, colography, CT colonoscopy, CT pneumocolon, virtual colonoscopy, and virtual endoscopy were used. Studies were selected if the focus was detection of colorectal polyps verified with within-subject reference colonoscopy by using key methodologic criteria based on information presented at the Fourth International Symposium on Virtual Colonoscopy (Boston, Mass). Two reviewers independently abstracted methodologic characteristics. Per-patient and per-polyp detection rates were extracted, and authors were contacted, when necessary. Per-patient sensitivity and specificity were calculated for different lesion size categories, and Forest plots were produced. Meta-analysis of paired sensitivity and specificity was conducted by using a hierarchical model that enabled estimation of summary receiver operating characteristic curves allowing for variation in diagnostic threshold, and the average operating point was calculated. Per-polyp sensitivity was also calculated.

RESULTS

Of 1398 studies considered for inclusion, 24 met our criteria. There were 4181 patients with a study prevalence of abnormality of 15%-72%. Meta-analysis of 2610 patients, 206 of whom had large polyps, showed high per-patient average sensitivity (93%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 73%, 98%) and specificity (97%; 95% CI: 95%, 99%) for colonography; sensitivity and specificity decreased to 86% (95% CI: 75%, 93%) and 86% (95% CI: 76%, 93%), respectively, when the threshold was lowered to include medium polyps. When polyps of all sizes were included, studies were too heterogeneous in sensitivity (range, 45%-97%) and specificity (range, 26%-97%) to allow meaningful meta-analysis. Of 150 cancers, 144 were detected (sensitivity, 95.9%; 95% CI: 91.4%, 98.5%). Data reporting was frequently incomplete, with no generally accepted format.

CONCLUSION

CT colonography seems sufficiently sensitive and specific in the detection of large and medium polyps; it is especially sensitive in the detection of symptomatic cancer. Studies are poorly reported, however, and the authors propose a minimum data set for study reporting.

State-of-the-art computed tomographic and magnetic resonance imaging of the gastrointestinal system

Among the major innovations in radiology of the gastrointestinal (GI) system are the replacement of classic invasive diagnostic methods with noninvasive ones and the improvement in lesion characterization and staging of pancreatobiliary malignancies. Developments in imaging technology have led to many improvements in the field of diagnostic GI radiology. With its fast and thin-section scanning abilities, multidetector-row CT (MDCT) strengthens the place of CT as the most efficient tool to diagnose, characterize, and preoperatively stage pancreatic neoplasms. MR cholangiopancreatography has widely replaced endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatobiliary malignancies. MR imaging, using phased-array or endorectal coils, demonstrates local tumor invasion accurately in rectal cancers and thus allows an improved surgical planning. Virtual colonoscopy with MDCTs is an efficient screening method for colon cancer, and MDCT enterography is becoming the standard imaging technique for many small bowel disorders. The continuing developments in CT and MR technology will most probably further improve the accuracy of these and other imaging applications in the near future.