Screening CT colonography in an asymptomatic average-risk Asian population: a 2-year experience in a single institution. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:W100-W106. [PMID: 18716076 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.07.3367]

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effectiveness, test accuracy, and harms of screening for CRC to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant studies published from January 1, 2015, to December 4, 2019; surveillance through March 26, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language studies conducted in asymptomatic populations at general risk of CRC.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently appraised the articles and extracted relevant study data from fair- or good-quality studies. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, test accuracy in detecting cancers or adenomas, and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

The review included 33 studies (n = 10 776 276) on the effectiveness of screening, 59 (n = 3 491 045) on the test performance of screening tests, and 131 (n = 26 987 366) on the harms of screening. In randomized clinical trials (4 trials, n = 458 002), intention to screen with 1- or 2-time flexible sigmoidoscopy vs no screening was associated with a decrease in CRC-specific mortality (incidence rate ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.68-0.80]). Annual or biennial guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) vs no screening (5 trials, n = 419 966) was associated with a reduction of CRC-specific mortality after 2 to 9 rounds of screening (relative risk at 19.5 years, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.84-0.98]; relative risk at 30 years, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.65-0.93]). In observational studies, receipt of screening colonoscopy (2 studies, n = 436 927) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) (1 study, n = 5.4 million) vs no screening was associated with lower risk of CRC incidence or mortality. Nine studies (n = 6497) evaluated the test accuracy of screening computed tomography (CT) colonography, 4 of which also reported the test accuracy of colonoscopy; pooled sensitivity to detect adenomas 6 mm or larger was similar between CT colonography with bowel prep (0.86) and colonoscopy (0.89). In pooled values, commonly evaluated FITs (14 studies, n = 45 403) (sensitivity, 0.74; specificity, 0.94) and stool DNA with FIT (4 studies, n = 12 424) (sensitivity, 0.93; specificity, 0.85) performed better than high-sensitivity gFOBT (2 studies, n = 3503) (sensitivity, 0.50-0.75; specificity, 0.96-0.98) to detect cancers. Serious harms of screening colonoscopy included perforations (3.1/10 000 procedures) and major bleeding (14.6/10 000 procedures). CT colonography may have harms resulting from low-dose ionizing radiation. It is unclear if detection of extracolonic findings on CT colonography is a net benefit or harm.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

There are several options to screen for colorectal cancer, each with a different level of evidence demonstrating its ability to reduce cancer mortality, its ability to detect cancer or precursor lesions, and its risk of harms.

PPV and Detection Rate of mt-sDNA Testing, FIT, and CT Colonography for Advanced Neoplasia: A Hierarchic Bayesian Meta-Analysis of the Noninvasive Colorectal Screening Tests

BACKGROUND. Noninvasive tests for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and prevention limit the need for invasive colonoscopy to follow up positive test results. However, the relative performance characteristics of available noninvasive tests have not yet been adequately compared. OBJECTIVE. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic performance of the available noninvasive CRC screening tests, including multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) testing, fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), and CT colonography (CTC), with an emphasis on comparison of PPV and detection rate (DR) for advanced neoplasia (AN; encompassing cases of advanced adenomas and CRC). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION. After systematic searches of MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases, 10 mt-sDNA, 27 CTC, and 88 FIT published screening studies involving 25,132, 33,493, and 2,355,958 asymptomatic adults, respectively, were included. Meta-analysis with hierarchic Bayesian modeling was conducted in accordance with Cochrane Collaboration and PRISMA guidelines to determine test positivity rates (TPRs) leading to optical colonoscopy, as well as PPVs and DRs for both AN and CRC. Different positivity thresholds were considered for FIT and CTC. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS. Point estimates (with 95% credible intervals) from pooled Bayesian meta-analysis combining all thresholds for FIT and stratifying CTC results by a polyp size threshold of 6 mm or larger (CTC6) and 10 mm or larger (CTC10) were calculated. TPR was 13.5% (10.9-16.6%) for mt-sDNA testing, 6.4% (5.8-7.2%) for FIT, 13.4% (11.4-15.6%) for CTC6, and 6.6% (5.2-7.7%) for CTC10. AN PPV was 26.9% (95% credible interval, 21.8-33.2%) for mt-sDNA testing, 31.8% (29.3-34.5%) for FIT, 34.4% (27.2-41.0%) for CTC6, and 61.0% (54.0-70.0%) for CTC10. CRC PPV was 2.4% (1.5-3.9%) for mt-sDNA testing, 4.9% (4.3-5.3%) for FIT, 3.5% (2.5-4.8%) for CTC6, and 6.0% (4.3-8.0%) for CTC10. The DR for AN was 3.4% (95% credible interval, 2.5-4.8%) for mt-SDNA, 2.0% (1.8-2.3%) for FIT, 4.8% (4.0-6.5%) for CTC6, and 4.0% (3.0-4.6%) for CTC10. When FIT is restricted to a lower threshold (< 10 μg Hb/g feces), its performance profile is similar to that of mt-sDNA testing, although available data are limited. AN PPV odds ratios (relative to CTC10 as the reference) were 0.24 (95% credible interval, 0.17-0.33) for mt-sDNA testing, 0.30 (0.24-0.45) for FIT, and 0.33 (0.25-0.47) for CTC6. CONCLUSION. Among noninvasive CRC screening tests, CTC with a polyp size threshold of 10 mm or larger most effectively targets AN, preserving detection while also decreasing unnecessary colonoscopies compared with mt-sDNA testing and FIT. CLINICAL IMPACT. CTC performed with a polyp size threshold for colonoscopy referral set at 10 mm or larger represents the most effective and efficient noninvasive screening test for CRC prevention and detection.

Measurement of smaller colon polyp in CT colonography images using morphological image processing

PURPOSE

Automated measurement of the size and shape of colon polyps is one of the challenges in Computed tomography colonography (CTC). The objective of this retrospective study was to improve the sensitivity and specificity of smaller polyp measurement in CTC using image processing techniques.

METHODS

A domain knowledge-based method has been implemented with hybrid method of colon segmentation, morphological image processing operators for detecting the colonic structures, and the decision-making system for delineating the smaller polyp-based on a priori knowledge.

RESULTS

The method was applied on 45 CTC dataset. The key finding was that the smaller polyps were accurately measured. In addition to 6-9 mm range, polyps of even <5 mm were also detected. The results were validated qualitatively and quantitatively using both 2D MPR and 3D view. Implementation was done on a high-performance computer with parallel processing. It takes [Formula: see text] min for measuring the smaller polyp in a dataset of 500 CTC images. With this method, [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] were achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

The domain-based approach with morphological image processing has given good results. The smaller polyps were measured accurately which helps in making right clinical decisions. Qualitatively and quantitatively the results were acceptable when compared to the ground truth at [Formula: see text].

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

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

Computed tomographic colonography is valuable for post-treatment evaluation and screening of hidden colorectal cancer in patients with cryptogenic pyogenic liver abscess

BACKGROUND/AIMS

It has been demonstrated that cryptogenic pyogenic liver abscess (PLA) is associated with colonic mucosal defect, especially colorectal cancer (CRC). Therefore, the screening of CRC in patients with cryptogenic PLA is important. This study was to investigate whether computed tomographic colonography (CTC) has value as a follow-up modality as well as CRC screening tool in patients with PLA.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation of 109 patients with cryptogenic PLA who underwent CTC or colonoscopy for CRC screening between July 2005 and July 2012 was performed. The patients were divided into a CTC group (n = 68) and colonoscopy group (n = 41) after treatment of liver abscess, and compared concerning the detection rate of advanced neoplasia, consisting of advanced adenomas and invasive carcinomas. Patients with advanced polyps in CTC surveillance underwent subsequent colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Advanced colonic neoplasia was detected in 9 of the 68 patients (13.2%) in the CTC group and 8 of the 41 patients (19.5%) in the conventional colonoscopy group (p = 0.42). The treatment response of all abscess lesions was clearly visualized on CTC, with complete resolution in 17.6% (12/68) of patients. After adjustment for sex and pathogens, old age (≥65 years) was significantly associated with advanced neoplasia (OR 5.481; 95% CI 1.757-17.100; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

CTC has a valuable dual role as a follow-up modality and in the screening of CRC in patients with cryptogenic PLA, particularly in elderly patients over 65 years of age.

Pilot study on image quality and radiation dose of CT colonography with adaptive iterative dose reduction three-dimensional

Objective

To investigate image quality and radiation dose of CT colonography (CTC) with adaptive iterative dose reduction three-dimensional (AIDR3D).

Methods

Ten segments of porcine colon phantom were collected, and 30 pedunculate polyps with diameters ranging from 1 to 15 mm were simulated on each segment. Image data were acquired with tube voltage of 120 kVp, and current doses of 10 mAs, 20 mAs, 30 mAs, 40 mAs, 50 mAs, respectively. CTC images were reconstructed using filtered back projection (FBP) and AIDR3D. Two radiologists blindly evaluated image quality. Quantitative evaluation of image quality included image noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). Qualitative image quality was evaluated with a five-score scale. Radiation dose was calculated based on dose-length product. Ten volunteers were examined supine 50 mAs with FBP and prone 20 mAs with AIDR3D, and image qualities were assessed. Paired t test was performed for statistical analysis.

Results

For 20 mAs with AIDR3D and 50 mAs with FBP, image noise, SNRs and CNRs were (16.4 ± 1.6) HU vs. (16.8 ± 2.6) HU, 1.9 ± 0.2 vs. 1.9 ± 0.4, and 62.3 ± 6.8 vs. 62.0 ± 6.2, respectively; qualitative image quality scores were 4.1 and 4.3, respectively; their differences were all not statistically significant. Compared with 50 mAs with FBP, radiation dose (1.62 mSv) of 20 mAs with AIDR3D was decreased by 60.0%. There was no statistically significant difference in image noise, SNRs, CNRs and qualitative image quality scores between prone 20 mAs with AIDR3D and supine 50 mAs with FBP in 10 volunteers, the former reduced radiation dose by 61.1%.

Conclusion

Image quality of CTC using 20 mAs with AIDR3D could be comparable to standard 50 mAs with FBP, radiation dose of the former reduced by about 60.0% and was only 1.62 mSv.

Virtual gastrointestinal colonoscopy in combination with large bowel endoscopy: Clinical application

Although colorectal cancer (CRC) has no longer been the leading cancer killer worldwide for years with the exponential development in computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography/CT as well as virtual colonoscopy for early detection, the CRC related mortality is still high. The objective of CRC screening is to reduce the burden of CRC and thereby the morbidity and mortality rates of the disease. It is believed that this goal can be achieved by regularly screening the average-risk population, enabling the detection of cancer at early, curable stages, and polyps before they become cancerous. Large-scale screening with multimodality imaging approaches plays an important role in reaching that goal to detect polyps, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis and CRC in early stage. This article reviews kinds of presentative imaging procedures for various screening options and updates detecting, staging and re-staging of CRC patients for determining the optimal therapeutic method and forecasting the risk of CRC recurrence and the overall prognosis. The combination use of virtual colonoscopy and conventional endoscopy, advantages and limitations of these modalities are also discussed.

In vivo CT dosimetry during CT colonography

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to develop a method of measuring rectal radiation dose in vivo during CT colonography (CTC) and assess the accuracy of size-specific dose estimates (SSDEs) relative to that of in vivo dose measurements.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thermoluminescent dosimeter capsules were attached to a CTC rectal catheter to obtain four measurements of the CT radiation dose in 10 volunteers (five men and five women; age range, 23-87 years; mean age, 70.4 years). A fixed CT technique (supine and prone, 50 mAs and 120 kVp each) was used for CTC. SSDEs and percentile body habitus measurements were based on CT images and directly compared with in vivo dose measurements.

RESULTS

The mean absorbed doses delivered to the rectum ranged from 8.8 to 23.6 mGy in the 10 patients, whose mean body habitus was in the 27th percentile among American adults 18-64 years old (range, 0.5-67th percentile). The mean SSDE error was 7.2% (range, 0.6-31.4%).

CONCLUSION

This in vivo radiation dose measurement technique can be applied to patients undergoing CTC. Our measurements indicate that SSDEs are reasonable estimates of the rectal absorbed dose. The data obtained in this pilot study can be used as benchmarks for assessing dose estimates using other indirect methods (e.g., Monte Carlo simulations).

[Korean guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and polyp detection]

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer in males and the fourth most common in females in Korea. Since the most of colorectal cancer occur through the prolonged transformation of adenomas into carcinomas, early detection and removal of colorectal adenomas are one of the most effective methods to prevent colorectal cancer. Considering the increasing incidence of colorectal cancer and polyps in Korea, it is very important to establish Korean guideline for colorectal cancer screening and polyp detection. Korean Multi-Society Take Force developed the guidelines with evidence-based methods. Parts of the statements drawn by systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Herein we discussed the epidemiology of colorectal cancers and adenomas in Korea, optimal screening methods for colorectal cancer, and detection for adenomas including fecal occult blood tests, radiologic tests, and endoscopic examinations.

Korean guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and polyp detection

Now colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer in males and the fourth most common cancer in females in Korea. Since most of colorectal cancers occur after the prolonged transformation of adenomas into carcinomas, early detection and removal of colorectal adenomas are one of the most effective methods to prevent colorectal cancer. Considering the increasing incidence of colorectal cancer and polyps in Korea, it is very important to establish Korean guideline for colorectal cancer screening and polyp detection. The guideline was developed by the Korean Multi-Society Take Force and we tried to establish the guideline by evidence-based methods. Parts of the statements were draw by systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Herein we discussed epidemiology of colorectal cancers and adenomas in Korea and optimal methods for screening of colorectal cancer and detection of adenomas including fecal occult blood tests, radiologic tests, and endoscopic examinations.

CT colonography without cathartic preparation: positive predictive value and patient experience in clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

To determine the positive predictive value (PPV) for polyps ≥ 6 mm detected at CT colonography (CTC) performed without cathartic preparation, with low-dose iodine faecal tagging regimen and to evaluate patient experience.

METHODS

1920 average-risk patients underwent CTC without cathartic preparation. Faecal tagging was performed by diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium at a total dose of 60 ml (22.2 g of iodine).The standard interpretation method was primary 3D with 2D problem solving. We calculated per-patient and per-polyp PPV in relation to size and morphology. All colonic segments were evaluated for image quality (faecal tagging, amount of liquid and solid residual faeces and luminal distension). Patients completed a questionnaire before and after CTC to assess preparation and examination experience.

RESULTS

Per-polyp PPV for detected lesions of ≥ 6 mm, 6-9 mm, ≥ 10 mm and ≥ 30 mm were 94.3%, 93.1%, 94.7% and 98%, respectively. Per-polyp PPV, according to lesion morphology, was 94.6%, 97.3% and 85.1% for sessile, pedunculated and flat polyps, respectively. Per-patient PPV was 92.8%. Preparation without frank cathartics was reported to cause minimal discomfort by 78.9% of patients.

CONCLUSION

CTC without cathartic preparation and low-dose iodine faecal tagging may yield high PPVs for lesions ≥ 6 mm and is well accepted by patients.

KEY POINTS

• Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) without cathartic preparation is well accepted by patients • Cathartic-free faecal tagging CTC yields high positive predictive values • CTC without cathartic preparation could improve uptake of colorectal cancer screening.

CT colonography in patients who have undergone sigmoid colostomy: a feasibility study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility of CT colonography of patients who have undergone sigmoid colostomy after abdominoperineal resection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seven men and 11 women (mean age, 57.2 ± 14.5 [SD] years) who had undergone abdominoperineal resection with sigmoid colostomy for rectal cancer were included. Colonic cleansing and fecal tagging were performed with magnesium citrate and 5% weight/volume barium. A conventional small rectal catheter with a retention balloon was introduced into the colonic stoma. An inflated balloon (15-25 mL) was positioned several centimeters beneath the skin. The interposed tissue acted as the mechanism for preventing balloon expulsion during colonic insufflation with carbon dioxide. Unenhanced right decubitus and contrast-enhanced supine images were obtained. Air-fluid leak, balloon expulsion, complications, and colonic distention evaluated on a 4-point scale in which 1 was the worst and 4 the best and mucosal coverage were assessed.

RESULTS

Examinations were performed uneventfully for all but one patient, who had temporary air and fluid leakage. The mean amount of carbon dioxide used was 2.64 ± 0.64 L. In the right decubitus position, the mean distention grade of each colonic segment was 2.7 ± 1.1 (sigmoid), 3.4 ± 0.6 (descending), 3.6 ± 0.5 (transverse), 3.6 ± 0.5 (ascending), and 3.7 ± 0.5 (cecum). In the supine position the mean grades were 2.7 ± 1.2, 3.1 ± 0.7, 3.7 ± 0.5, 3.7 ± 0.5, and 3.8 ± 0.4. Four patients (22.2%) had segments not adequately visualized in either position owing to luminal collapse; all of these segments were in the sigmoid colon. Three patients (16.7%) had areas submerged under fecal matter in both positions, but these areas were evaluable because of fecal tagging or IV contrast enhancement.

CONCLUSION

CT colonographic examination through a sigmoid stoma was technically feasible with currently available instruments, but further improvements in technique are needed.

Diagnostic value of CT-colonography as compared to colonoscopy in an asymptomatic screening population: a meta-analysis

Objectives

Previous meta-analyses on CT-colonography included both average and high risk individuals, which may overestimate the diagnostic value in screening. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain the value of CT-colonography for screening.

Methods

A search was performed using PubMed, Embase and Cochrane. Article selection and critical appraisal was done by two reviewers. Inclusion criteria: prospective, randomized trials or cohort studies comparing CT-colonography with colonoscopy (≥50 participants), ≥95% average risk participants ≥50 years. Study characteristics and 2 × 2 contingency Tables were recorded. Sensitivity and specificity estimates were calculated per patient and per polyp (≥6 mm, ≥10 mm), using univariate and bivariate analyses.

Results

Five of 1,021 studies identified were included, including 4,086 participants (<1% high risk). I²-values showed substantial heterogeneity, especially for 6–9 mm polyps and adenomas: 68.1% vs. 78.6% (sensitivity per patient). Estimated sensitivities for patients with polyps or adenomas ≥ 6 mm were 75.9% and 82.9%, corresponding specificities 94.6% and 91.4%. Estimated sensitivities for patients with polyps or adenomas ≥ 10 mm were 83.3% and 87.9%, corresponding specificities 98.7% and 97.6%. Estimated sensitivities per polyp for advanced adenomas ≥ 6 mm and ≥ 10 mm were 83.9% and 83.8%.

Conclusion

Compared to colonoscopy, CT-colonography has a high sensitivity for adenomas ≥ 10 mm. For (advanced) adenomas ≥ 6 mm sensitivity is somewhat lower.

High positive predictive value of CT colonography in a referral centre

AIM

To assess the positive predictive value (PPV) of CTC in the clinical routine of a dedicated referral centre.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All consecutive patients referred for CTC between May 2009 and May 2010 were considered for inclusion in this study. All the patients who, following the diagnosis of a>6 mm polyp or mass at CTC, underwent a post-CTC colonoscopy within eight weeks from diagnosis were included. Per patient PPV for lesions, adenomas and advanced neoplasia was calculated. Chi-square test was used for statistical comparison, and a p value<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

516 patients were included in the study. Of them, 76 (14%) patients had at least one lesion≥6 mm on CTC. Overall, 59 (11%) patients were diagnosed at CTC with at least one polyp, 12 (2%) with a flat lesions, and 5 (1%) with a mass. Per-patient PPVs for any lesion>6 mm, neoplasia, and advanced neoplasia were 96% (95% CI: 92-100%), 68.4% (95% CI: 58-79%), and 30% (95% CI: 20-41%), respectively. PPV for neoplasia and advanced neoplasia was substantially higher for >10 mm lesions.

CONCLUSION

In dedicated centers, CTC appears to be a highly specific procedure, characterized by a very low rate of false-positive results for >6 mm lesions.

CT colonography for postoperative surveillance after curative gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer

AIM

The purpose was to evaluate the diagnostic role of contrast-enhanced CT colonography (CTC) for follow-up of colorectal cancer screening after curative gastrectomy in patients with gastric adenocarcinomas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Contrast-enhanced CTC was performed as a substitute for routine follow-up CT for the detection of recurrent lesions in 700 consecutive patients who underwent curative surgery for gastric adenocarcinomas. Prospectively, patients with polyps measuring 6 mm or larger on CTC were referred for optical colonoscopy. Clinical and radiologic follow-up with respect to detection of polyp and recurrent lesion was retrospectively assessed.

RESULTS

Colorectal polyps measuring 6 mm or larger were identified by CTC in 104 (14.9%) of the 700 patients. Optical colonoscopy was recommended to these patients and was performed in 72 cases. True positive lesions were identified in 62 of the 72 patients (per-patient positive predictive value: 86.1%). The diagnostic yield for primary colonic malignancies was 1.6% (11/700). Recurrent lesions of gastric cancer were also detected in eight patients (1.1%).

CONCLUSION

In patients who undergo gastrectomy due to gastric adenocarcinoma, contrast-enhanced CTC may offer a unique advantage by allowing simultaneous colorectal cancer screening in addition to its routine role of detecting recurrent lesions during follow-up.

CT colonography for combined colonic and extracolonic surveillance after curative resection of colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To determine the accuracy of contrast material-enhanced computed tomographic (CT) colonography for postoperative surveillance in colorectal cancer patients without clinical or laboratory evidence of disease recurrence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Institutional Review Board approved this HIPAA-compliant study and waived informed consent. Between January 2006 and December 2007, 742 consecutive patients without clinical or laboratory evidence of recurrence following curative-intent colorectal cancer surgery underwent contrast-enhanced CT colonography. Of these, 548 patients who had subsequent colonoscopy and pathologic confirmation of colonic lesions (reference standard) were included in the colonic analysis. All 742 patients were included in the extracolonic analysis. Sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography for nonanastomotic colonic lesions at least 6 mm in size and anastomotic lesions of any size, including performance according to lesion histologic type, were determined. Diagnostic yields of contrast-enhanced CT colonography for colonic cancers and for extracolonic recurrences were obtained.

RESULTS

CT colonography depicted all six metachronous cancers and one anastomotic recurrence within the colon in six patients (0.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.3%, 1.8%]), for per-patient and per-lesion sensitivities of 100% (95% CIs: 64.3%, 100% and 67.8%, 100%, respectively). All cancer lesions within the colon were amenable to additional curative treatment. CT colonography per-patient and per-lesion sensitivity was 81.8% (95% CI: 60.9%, 93.3%) and 80.8% (95% CI: 64.3%, 97.2%), respectively, for advanced neoplasia and 80.0% (95% CI: 68.6%, 88.1%) and 78.5% (95% CI: 68.3%, 88.7%), respectively, for all adenomatous lesions. Negative predictive values for adenocarcinoma, advanced neoplasia, and all adenomatous lesions were 100%, 99.1%, and 97.0%, respectively. CT colonography specificity was 93.1% (95% CI: 90.4%, 95.2%). Contrast-enhanced CT colonography enabled detection of extracolonic recurrences in an additional 11 patients (1.5%; 95% CI: 0.8%, 2.7%).

CONCLUSION

Contrast-enhanced CT colonography is an accurate and practical surveillance tool following colorectal cancer surgery in patients without clinical or laboratory evidence of recurrence, allowing for simultaneous less-invasive evaluation of both colon and extracolonic organs.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.10100385/-/DC1.

Colorectal cancer screening: The role of CT colonography

Computed tomography colonography (CTC) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has two roles: one present and the other potential. The present role is, without any further discussion, the integration into established screening programs as a replacement for barium enema in the case of incomplete colonoscopy. The potential role is the use of CTC as a first-line screening method together with Fecal Occult Blood Test, sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. However, despite the fact that CTC has been officially endorsed for CRC screening of average-risk individuals by different scientific societies including the American Cancer Society, the American College of Radiology, and the US Multisociety Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, other entities, such as the US Preventive Services Task Force, have considered the evidence insufficient to justify its use as a mass screening method. Medicare has also recently denied reimbursement for CTC as a screening test. Nevertheless, multiple advantages exist for using CTC as a CRC screening test: high accuracy, full evaluation of the colon in virtually all patients, non-invasiveness, safety, patient comfort, detection of extracolonic findings and cost-effectiveness. The main potential drawback of a CTC screening is the exposure to ionizing radiation. However, this is not a major issue, since low-dose protocols are now routinely implemented, delivering a dose comparable or slightly superior to the annual radiation exposure of any individual. Indirect evidence exists that such a radiation exposure does not induce additional cancers.

Does the amount of tagged stool and fluid significantly affect the radiation exposure in low-dose CT colonography performed with an automatic exposure control?

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the amount of tagged stool and fluid significantly affects the radiation exposure in low-dose screening CT colonography performed with an automatic tube-current modulation technique.

METHODS

The study included 311 patients. The tagging agent was barium (n = 271) or iodine (n = 40). Correlation was measured between mean volume CT dose index (CTDI (vol)) and the estimated x-ray attenuation of the tagged stool and fluid (ATT). Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to determine the effect of ATT on CTDI (vol ) and the effect of ATT on image noise while adjusting for other variables including abdominal circumference.

RESULTS

CTDI (vol) varied from 0.88 to 2.54 mGy. There was no significant correlation between CTDI (vol) and ATT (p = 0.61). ATT did not significantly affect CTDI (vol) (p = 0.93), while abdominal circumference was the only factor significantly affecting CTDI (vol) (p < 0.001). Image noise ranged from 59.5 to 64.1 HU. The p value for the regression model explaining the noise was 0.38.

CONCLUSION

The amount of stool and fluid tagging does not significantly affect radiation exposure.

CT colonography after metallic stent placement for acute malignant colonic obstruction

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of using computed tomographic (CT) colonography for preoperative examination of the proximal colon after metallic stent placement in patients with acute colon obstruction caused by colorectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Institutional review board approval was obtained, and patient informed consent was waived. Fifty patients (mean age +/- standard deviation, 58.5 years +/- 11.7), who demonstrated no postprocedural complication after successful placement of self-expandable metallic stents to treat acute colon obstruction caused by cancer, underwent CT colonography 1-43 days (median, 5 days) after stent placement. CT colonography was performed after cathartic preparation by using magnesium citrate (n = 20) or sodium phosphate (n = 3), combined with oral bisacodyl, or by using polyethylene glycol (n = 27). Fecal/fluid tagging was achieved by using 100 mL of meglumine diatrizoate. The colon was distended by means of pressure-monitored CO(2) insufflation. The sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography in evaluating the colon proximal to the stent and CT colonography-related complications were assessed. The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for proportional data.

RESULTS

Per-lesion and per-patient sensitivities of CT colonography for lesions 6 mm or larger in diameter in the colon proximal to the stent were 85.7% (12 of 14 lesions; 95% CI: 58.8%, 97.2%) and 90% (nine of 10 patients; 95% CI: 57.4%, 99.9%), respectively. CT colonography depicted all synchronous cancers (two lesions) and advanced adenomas (five lesions). Per-patient specificity for lesions 6 mm and larger in the proximal colon was 85.7% (18 of 21 patients; 95% CI: 64.5%, 95.9%). CT colonography did not generate any false diagnosis of synchronous cancer. False-positive findings at CT colonography did not result in a change in surgical plan for any patients. No CT colonography-associated stent dislodgment/migration or colonic perforation occurred in any patient (95% CI: 0%, 6.2%).

CONCLUSION

CT colonography is a safe and useful method for preoperative examination of the proximal colon after metallic stent placement in patients with acute colon obstruction caused by cancer. (c) RSNA, 2010.

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.

Comparison of a unidirectional panoramic 3D endoluminal interpretation technique to traditional 2D and bidirectional 3D interpretation techniques at CT colonography: preliminary observations

AIM

To compare the evaluation times and accuracy of unidirectional panoramic three-dimensional (3D) endoluminal interpretation to traditional two-dimensional (2D) and bidirectional 3D endoluminal techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-nine patients underwent computed tomography colonography (CTC) after bowel cleansing. Forty-five had no polyps and 24 had at least one polyp > or = 6 mm. Patients underwent same-day colonoscopy with segmental unblinding. Three experienced abdominal radiologists evaluated the data using one of three primary interpretation techniques: (1) 2D; (2) bidirectional 3D; (3) panoramic 3D. Mixed model analysis of variance and logistic regression for correlated data were used to compare techniques with respect to time and sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

Mean evaluation times were 8.6, 14.6, and 12.1 min, for 2D, 3D, and panoramic, respectively. 2D was faster than either 3D technique (p < 0.0001), and the panoramic technique was faster than bidirectional 3D (p = 0.0139). The overall sensitivity of each technique per polyp and per patient was 68.4 and 76.7% for 2D, 78.9 and 93.3% for 3D; and 78.9 and 86.7% for panoramic 3D.

CONCLUSION

2D interpretation was the fastest overall, the panoramic technique was significantly faster than the bidirectional with similar sensitivity and specificity. The sensitivity for a single reader was significantly lower using the 2D technique. Each reader should select the technique with which they are most successful.

Efficacy of barium-based fecal tagging for CT colonography: a comparison between the use of high and low density barium suspensions in a Korean population - a preliminary study

OBJECTIVE

This preliminarily study was designed to determine and to compare the efficacy of two commercially available barium-based fecal tagging agents for CT colonography (CTC) (high-density [40% w/v] and low-density [4.6% w/v] barium suspensions) in a population in Korea.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a population with an identified with an average-risk for colorectal cancer, 15 adults were administered three doses of 20 ml 40% w/v barium for fecal tagging (group I) and 15 adults were administered three doses of 200 ml 4.6% w/v barium (group II) for fecal tagging. Excluding five patients in group I and one patient in group II that left the study, ten patients in group I and 14 patients in group II were finally included in the analysis. Two experienced readers evaluated the CTC images in consensus regarding the degree of tagging of stool pieces 6 mm or larger. Stool pieces were confirmed with the use of standardized CTC criteria or the absence of matched lesions as seen on colonoscopy. The rates of complete fecal tagging were analyzed on a per-lesion and a per-segment basis and were compared between the patients in the two groups.

RESULTS

Per-lesion rates of complete fecal tagging were 52% (22 of 42; 95% CI, 37.7-66.6%) in group I and 78% (28 of 36; 95% CI, 61.7-88.5%) in group II. The difference between the two groups did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.285). The per-segment rates of complete tagging were 33% (6 of 18; 95% CI, 16.1%-56.4%) in group I and 60% (9 of 15; 95% CI, 35.7%-80.3%) in group II; again, the difference between the two groups did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.171).

CONCLUSION

Barium-based fecal tagging using both the 40% w/v and the 4.6% w/v barium suspensions showed moderate tagging efficacy. The preliminary comparison did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the tagging efficacy between the use of the two tagging agents, despite the tendency toward better tagging with the use of the 4.6% w/v barium suspension.