Advertisement

Current role and future potential of computed tomographic colonography for colorectal polyp detection and colon cancer screening—incidental findings

      Abstract

      Aim

      In this retrospective study, we assess the current role and future potential of computed tomographic (CT) colonography as a viable alternative imaging tool for colorectal polyp detection and colon cancer screening.

      Materials and methods

      Twenty patients have undergone virtual colonographic examinations with 64-multidetector-row spiral CT (MDCT), and three-dimensional images were created on a separate workstation that had the appropriate software for image processing. Images were reviewed by a radiologist, and anatomic division of the entire colon was used to locate the suspected lesions. Characteristics of bowel preparation, intracolonic, extracolonic, and incidental findings were noted, too.

      Results

      Ten of the 20 patients (50%) had a positive CT colonography for polypoid lesions. Those lesions were distributed into the cecum (4 cases), colon ascendens (2 cases), colon descendens (2 cases), and sigma (2 cases). In 80%, bowel preparation was good, in 15% moderate, and in 5% inadequate. Furthermore, CT scan noted in total 20 incidental findings.

      Conclusion

      CT colonography is currently a viable alternative imaging tool for colorectal polyp detection. There are several clinical situations where CT colonography may play an important role in patient care. These include for example evaluation of the colon after an incomplete conventional colonoscopic examination or evaluation in patients who are clinically unfit to undergo conventional colonoscopy. At centers where there is expertise in data acquisition and interpretation, CT colonography is being offered as a routine imaging examination. With continued improvements in bowel preparation, colonic distention, and CT colonography interpretation by sufficient numbers of radiologists this technology might have a substantial influence on colon cancer screening.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Clinical Imaging
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Ransohoff DF
        • Sandler RS
        Clinical practice: screening for colorectal cancer.
        N Engl J Med. 2002; 346: 40-44
        • Jemal A
        • Tiwari RC
        • Murray T
        • et al.
        Cancer statistics, 2004.
        CA Cancer J Clin. 2004; 54: 8-29
        • Jemal A
        • Murray T
        • Ward E
        • et al.
        Cancer statistics 2005.
        CA Cancer J Clin. 2005; 55: 10-30
        • Fletcher JG
        • Booya F
        • Johnson CD
        • Ahlquist D
        CT colonography: unraveling the twists and turns.
        Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2005; 21: 90-98
        • Barish MA
        • Soto JA
        • Ferrucci JT
        Consensus on current clinical practice of virtual colonoscopy.
        Am J Roentgenol. 2005; 184: 786-792
        • Macari M
        CT colonography: the real deal.
        Abdom Imaging. 2005; 30: 184-194
        • Pickhardt PJ
        • Choi JR
        • Hwang I
        • et al.
        Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults.
        N Engl J Med. 2003; 349: 2191-2200
        • Dachman AH
        • Glick S
        • Yoshida H
        Computed tomography colonography and colon cancer screening.
        Semin Roentgenol. 2003; 38: 54-64
        • Yee J
        • Akerkar GA
        • Hung RK
        • Steinauer-Gebauer AM
        • Wall SD
        • McQuaid KR
        Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients.
        Radiology. 2001; 219: 685-692
        • Johnson CD
        • Toledano AY
        • Herman BA
        • et al.
        Computerized tomographic colonography: performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting.
        Gastroenterology. 2003; 125: 688-695
        • Sosna J
        • Morrin MM
        • Copel L
        • Raptopoulos V
        • Kruskal JB
        Computed tomography colonography (virtual colonoscopy): update on technique, applications, and future developments.
        Surg Technol Int. 2003; 11: 102-110
        • Cotton PB
        • Durkalski VL
        • Pineau BC
        • et al.
        Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia.
        JAMA. 2004; 291: 1713-1719
        • Villavicencio RT
        • Rex DK
        Colonic adenomas: prevalence and incidence rates, growth rates, and miss rates at colonoscopy.
        Semin Gastrointest Dis. 2000; 11: 185-193
        • Kaiser AM
        • Ortega AE
        Anorectal anatomy.
        Surg Clin North Am. 2002; 82: 1125-1138
        • Pickhardt PJ
        • Taylor AJ
        • Kim DH
        • Reichelderfer M
        • Gopal DV
        • Pfau PR
        Screening for colorectal neoplasia with CT colonography: initial experience from the first year of coverage by third-party payers.
        Radiology. 2006; 241: 417-425
        • Pickhardt PJ
        • Taylor AJ
        • Johnson GL
        • et al.
        Building a CT colonography program: necessary ingredients for reimbursement and clinical success.
        Radiology. 2005; 235: 17-20
        • Macari M
        • Bini EJ
        • Jacobs SL
        • Lange N
        • Lui YW
        Filling defects in the colon at CT colonography: pseudo and diminutive lesions (the good), polyps (the bad), flat lesions, masses, and carcinomas (the ugly).
        Radiographics. 2003; 23: 1073-1091
        • Gluecker TM
        • Johnson CD
        • Harmsen WS
        • et al.
        Colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography, colonoscopy, and double contrast barium enema examination: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences.
        Radiology. 2003; 227: 378-384
        • Ristvedt SL
        • McFarland EG
        • Weinstock LB
        • Thyssen EP
        Patient preferences for CT colonography, conventional colonoscopy, and bowel preparation.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2003; 98: 578-585
        • Vining DJ
        • Gelfand DW
        • Bechtold RE
        • et al.
        Technical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality (abstr).
        Am J Roentgenol. 1994; 162: 194
        • Rex DK
        Virtual colonoscopy: time for some tough questions for radiologists and gastroenterologists (editorial).
        Endoscopy. 2000; 32: 260-263
        • Royster AP
        • Fenlon HM
        • Clarke PD
        • Nunes DP
        • Ferrucci JT
        CT colonoscopy of colorectal neoplasm: two-dimensional and three-dimensional virtual-reality techniques with colonoscopic correlation.
        Am J Roentgenol. 1997; 169: 1237-1242
        • Hara AK
        • Johnson CD
        • Reed JE
        • et al.
        Detection of colorectal polyps with CT colography: initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity.
        Radiology. 1997; 205: 59-65
        • Fenlon HM
        • Ferrucci JT
        Virtual colonoscopy: what will the issues be?.
        Am J Roentgenol. 1997; 169: 453-458
        • Hara AK
        • Johnson CD
        • Reed JE
        • Ehman RL
        • Ilsrtup DM
        Colorectal polyp detection with CT colography: two- versus three-dimensional techniques.
        Radiology. 1996; 200: 49-54
        • Dachman AH
        • Lieberman J
        • Osnis RB
        • et al.
        Small simulated polyps in pig colon: sensitivity of CT virtual colography.
        Radiology. 1997; 203: 427-430
        • Dachman AH
        • Kuniyoshi JK
        • Boyle CM
        • et al.
        CT colonography with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps.
        Am J Roentgenol. 1998; 171: 989-995
        • Macari M
        • Milano A
        • Lavelle M
        • Berman P
        • Megibow AJ
        Comparison of time-efficient CT colonography with two-dimensional and three dimensional colonic evaluation for detecting colorectal polyps.
        Am J Roentgenol. 2000; 174: 1543-1549
        • Angtuaco TL
        • Bannaad-Omiotek GD
        • Howden CW
        Differing attitudes toward virtual and conventional colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening: surveys among primary care physicians and potential patients.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2001; 96: 887-893
        • Svensson MH
        • Svensson I
        • Lasson A
        • Hellstrom M
        Patient acceptance of CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy: prospective comparative study in patients with or suspected of having colorectal disease.
        Radiology. 2002; 222: 337-345
        • Akerkar GA
        • Hung RK
        • Yee J
        • et al.
        Virtual colonoscopy: real pain (abstr).
        Gastroenterology. 1999; 116: A44
        • Rajapaksa R
        • Macari M
        • Weinshel E
        • Bini EJ
        Patient preferences and satisfaction with virtual vs. conventional colonoscopy.
        in: Presented at the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Topic Forum sessions at Digestive Disease Week (DDW) 2002, San Francisco, California, May 19–222002
        • Macari M
        • Bini EJ
        • Xue X
        • et al.
        Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thin section low-dose multi–detector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection.
        Radiology. 2002; 224: 383-392
        • Fletcher JG
        • Johnson CD
        • Welch TJ
        • et al.
        Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients.
        Radiology. 2000; 216: 704-711
        • Chen SC
        • Lu DS
        • Hecht JR
        • Ladell BM
        CT colonography: value of scanning in both the supine and prone positions.
        Am J Roentgenol. 1999; 172: 595-600
        • Yee J
        • Hung RK
        • Akekar GA
        • Wall SD
        The usefulness of glucagon hydrochloride for colonic distension.
        Am J Roentgenol. 1999; 173: 169-172
        • Ransohoff DF
        Virtual colonoscopy: what it can do vs what it will do (editorial).
        JAMA. 2004; 291: 1772-1774
        • Macari M
        • Megibow AJ
        • Berman P
        • Milano A
        • Dicker M
        CT colography in patients with failed colonoscopy.
        Am J Roentgenol. 1999; 173: 561-564
        • Morrin MM
        • Kruskal JB
        • Farrell RJ
        • et al.
        Endoluminal CT colonography after incomplete endoscopic colonoscopy.
        Am J Roentgenol. 1999; 172: 913-918
        • Fenlon HM
        • McAneny DB
        • Nunes DP
        • Clarke PD
        • Ferrucci JT
        Occlusive colon carcinoma: virtual colonoscopy in the preoperative evaluation of the proximal colon.
        Radiology. 1999; 210: 423-428
        • Johnson CD
        • Dachman AH
        CT colonography: The next colon screening examination.
        Radiology. 2000; 216: 331-341
        • Macari M
        • Bini EJ
        • Milano A
        • et al.
        Clinical significance of missed polyps at CT colonography.
        Am J Roentgenol. 2004; 183: 127-134
        • Spinzi G
        • Belloni G
        • Martegani A
        • Del Favero C
        • Minoli G
        Computed tomographic colonography and conventional colonoscopy for colon diseases: a prospective blinded study.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2001; 96: 394-400
        • Schoepf J
        • Goldhaber SZ
        • Costello P
        Spiral computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism.
        Circulation. 2004; 109: 2160-2167
        • Fidler JL
        • Fletcher JG
        • Johnson CD
        • et al.
        Understanding interpretive errors in radiologists learning computed tomographic colonography.
        Acad Radiol. 2004; 11: 750-756
        • Sanford MS
        • Pickhardt PJ
        Diagnostic performance of primary 3-dimensional computed tomography colonography in the setting of colonic diverticular disease.
        Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006; 4: 1039-1047
        • Pickhardt PJ
        • Nugent PA
        • Choi JR
        • Schindler WR
        Flat colorectal lesions in asymptomatic adults: implications for screening with CT virtual colonoscopy.
        Am J Roentgenol. 2004; 183: 1343-1347
        • Pickhardt PJ
        High-magnification chromoscopic colonoscopy: caution needs to be exercised before changing screening policy.
        Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 186 ([reply]): 577-578
        • Pickhardt PJ
        Translucency rendering in 3D endoluminal CT colonography: a useful tool for increasing polyp specificity and decreasing interpretation time.
        Am J Roentgenol. 2004; 183: 429-436
        • Prout TM
        • Taylor AJ
        • Pickhardt PJ
        Inverted appendiceal stumps simulating large pedunculated polyps at screening CT colonography.
        Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 186: 535-538
        • Lee AD
        • Pickhardt PJ
        • Gopal DV
        • Taylor AJ
        Venous malformations mimicking multiple mucosal polyps at screening CT colonography.
        Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 186: 1113-1115
        • Pickhardt PJ
        • Choi JR
        Adenomatous polyp obscured by small-caliber rectal catheter at CT colonography: a rare diagnostic pitfall.
        Am J Roentgenol. 2005; 184: 1581-1583