Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

CT-Kolonographie: Patientenvorbereitung und Untersuchungstechnik

CT colonography: patient preparation and examination technique

  • Leitthema: Kolondiagnostik
  • Published:
Der Radiologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Eine den Erfordernissen der CT-Kolonographie angepasste Untersuchungstechnik ist nicht nur eine grundlegende Voraussetzung für eine qualitätsvolle Untersuchung und korrekte Befunderstellung, sondern auch für den weit reichenden Einsatz dieser Untersuchungsmethode. Die Technik der CT-Kolonographie basiert auf guter Patientenvorbereitung mit Hilfe von „fecal tagging“, der adäquaten Distension des Kolons mittels CO2 und der Datenakquisition in Dünnschichttechnik sowohl in Rücken- als auch in Bauchlage mittels Low-dose-Protokoll. In diesem Artikel werden die verschiedenen technischen Aspekte der CT-Kolonographie erläutert.

Abstract

An examination technique adapted to comply with the demands of CT colonography is not only a basic requirement for a high-quality examination and correct ascertainment of the findings; it is also essential for far-reaching applications of this method of examination. The technique of CT colonography is based on good patient preparation with the aid of fecal tagging, adequate distension of the colon with CO2 and acquisition of data with the patient both prone and supine in a thin-slice technique using a low-dose protocol. The different technical aspects of CT colonography are explained in this paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4

Literatur

  1. Pickhardt P, Choi JR, Hwan I et al. (2003) Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 349: 2191–2200

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cotton PB, Durkalski VL, Pineau BC et al. (2004) Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy). A multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 291: 1713–1719

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Rockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwiecki D et al. (2005) Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet 365: 305–311

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Taylor S, Laghi A, Lefere P et al. (2007) European society of gastrointestinal and abdominal radiology (ESGAR): consensus statement on CT colonography. Eur Radiol 17: 575–579

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Barish MA, Soto JA, Ferrucci JT (2005) Consensus on current clinical practice of virtual colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184: 786–792

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Morrin MM, Farrell RJ, Kruskal JB et al. (2000) Utility of intravenously administered contrast material at CT colonography. Radiology 217: 765–771

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Macari M, Lavelle M, Pedrosa I et al. (2001) Effect of different bowel preparations on residual fluid at CT colonography. Radiology 218: 274–277

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Food and Drug Administration (2007) Science backgrounder: safety of sodium phosphates oral solution. http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/safety/sodiumphospate.htm – 05-03-2007

  9. Fass R, Do S, Hixson LJ (1997) Fatal hyperphosphatemia and hypocalcemic tetany in an adults report of a case. Dis Colon Rectum 40: 497–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Food and Drug Administration (2006) Food and Drug Administration science background paper: acute phosphate nephropathy and renal failure associated with the use of oral sodium phosphate bowel cleansing products. http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/OSP_solution/science_background.pdf – 05-05-2006

  11. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Hinshaw DJ et al. (2007) Prospective blinded trial comparing 45-ml and 90-ml doses of oral sodium phosphate for bowel preparation before computed tomographic colonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 31: 53–58

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Wiberg JJ, Turner GG, Nuttall FQ (1978) Effect of phosphate or magnesium cathartics on serum calcium: observations in normocalcemic patients. Arch Intern Med 138: 1114–1116

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Manual on contrast media. Version 5.0. Iodinated gastrointestinal contrast media: indications and guidelines, pp 37–39

  14. Lefere PA, Gryspeerdt SS, Dewyspelaere J et al. (2002) Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT colonography: initial results – polyp detection and patient compliance. Radiology 224: 393–403

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lefere P, Gryspeerdt S, Marrannes J et al. (2005) CT colonography after fecal tagging with a reduced cathartic cleansing and a reduced volume of barium. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184: 1836–1842

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C et al. (2004) Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 127: 1300–1311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Johnson CD, Manduca A, Carston M et al. (2006) CTC of the noncathartic colon: performance appraisal using combined unsubtracted and stool subtracted data sets. RSNA, Chicago

  18. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Goh V et al. (2003) Optimizing colonic distention for multi-row CT colonography: effect of hyoscine butylbromide rectal ballon catheter. Radiology 229: 99–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rogalla P, Lembcke A, Ruckert JC et al. (2005) Spasmolysis at CT colonography: butyl scopolamine versus glucagon. Radiology 236: 184–188

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Yee J, Hung RK, Akerkar GA et al. (1999) The usefulness of glucagon hydrochloride for colonic distention in CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173: 169–172

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Shinners TJ, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ et al. (2006) Patient-controlled room air insufflation versus automated carbon dioxide delivery for CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186: 1491–1496

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Burling D, Taylor SA, Halligan S et al. (2006) Automated insufflation of carbon dioxide for MDCT colonography: distension and patient experience compared with manual insufflation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186: 96–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yee J, Kumar NN, Hung RK et al. (2003) Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography. Radiology 226: 653–661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gryspeerdt S, Herman M, Lefere P et al. (2004) Supine/left decubitus scanning: a valuable alternative to supine/prone scanning in CT colonography. Eur Radiol 14: 768–777

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sosna J, Blachar A, Amitai M et al. (2006) Colonic perforation at CT colonography: assessment of risk in a multicenter large cohort. Radiology 239: 457–463

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Burling D, Halligan S, Slater A et al. (2006) Potentially serious adverse events at CT colonography in symptomatic patients: national survey of the United Kingdom. Radiology 239: 464–471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pickhardt PJ (2006) Incidence of colonic perforation at CT colonography: review of existing data and implication for screening of asymptomatic adults. Radiology 239: 313–316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C et al. (2003) Detection of colorectal lesions: lower dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 229: 775–781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jensch S, van Gelder RE, Venema HW (2006) Effective radiation doses in CTC colonography: results of an inventory among research institutions. Eur Radiol 16: 981–987

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Graser A, Wintersperger BJ, Suess C et al. (2006) Dose reduction and image quality in MDCT colonography using tube current modulation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187: 695–701

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Brenner DJ, Georgsson MA (2005) Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology 129: 328–337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor ist Berater bei EZEM.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Stedelijk Ziekenhuis, Bruggesteenweg 90, B-8800, Roeselare, Belgien

    P. Lefere & S. Gryspeerdt

  2. Abt. Radiologie, Medizinische Universität Wien, Wien, Österreich

    T. Mang

Authors
  1. P. Lefere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Gryspeerdt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Mang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Lefere.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lefere, P., Gryspeerdt, S. & Mang, T. CT-Kolonographie: Patientenvorbereitung und Untersuchungstechnik. Radiologe 48, 126–134 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-007-1602-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-007-1602-9

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation