Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

CT Colonography to exclude colorectal cancer in symptomatic patients

  • Computed Tomography
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

CT Colonography (CTC) is being increasingly used for the radiological evaluation of colorectal symptoms. Aim of this study was to assess the role of CTC in excluding a colorectal cancer (CRC) in older symptomatic patients.

Methods

1,359 CTC studies performed between March 2002 and December 2007 were analysed retrospectively. Gold standard was an endoscopic examination within 1 year and/or clinical, endoscopic and/or radiological follow-up until the time of data analysis. Patients not diagnosed as having a CRC on CTC were assumed as true-negatives if the gold standard was negative and did not feature on the regional cancer registry (at least 18 months post-CTC). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for detection of colorectal cancer.

Results

After exclusions, 1,177 CTC studies were included. These were undertaken in 463 men and 714 women. Median age of patients undergoing CTC was 71 (range, 27–96) years. 59 invasive CRC were detected. Median follow-up was 34.5 (range 18–84) months. Three small colorectal cancers were missed. Sensitivity and negative predictive value for CRC were 94.9% (95% CI:84.9%–98.7%) and 99.7% (95% CI:99.1%–99.9%) respectively.

Conclusions

CTC has a high sensitivity and negative predictive value in excluding a CRC in patients with colorectal symptoms.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Terhaar Sive Droste JS, Craanen ME, van der Hulst RW et al (2009) Colonoscopic yield of colorectal neoplasia in daily clinical practice. World J Gastroenterol 15:1085–1092

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Loffeld RJ, van der Putten AB (2009) The completion rate of colonoscopy in normal daily practice: factors associated with failure. Digestion 80:267–270

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bowles CJ, Leicester R, Romaya C, Swarbrick E, Williams CB, Epstein O (2004) A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow? Gut 53:277–283

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Gopal DV (2006) Surface visualization at 3D endoluminal CT colonography: degree of coverage and implications for polyp detection. Gastroenterology 130:1582–1587

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. East JE, Saunders BP, Burling D, Boone D, Halligan S, Taylor SA (2007) Surface visualization at CT colonography simulated colonoscopy: effect of varying field of view and retrograde view. Am J Gastroenterol 102:2529–2535

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Kim KP, Yee J (2010) CT colonography: perforation rates and potential radiation risks. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 20:279–291

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Khan JS, Moran BJ (2009) Iatrogenic perforation at colonic imaging. Colorectal Dis

  8. Yee J, Sadda S, Aslam R, Yeh B Extracolonic findings at CT colonography. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 20:305–322

  9. Tolan DJ, Armstrong EM, Chapman AH (2007) Replacing barium enema with CT colonography in patients older than 70 years: the importance of detecting extracolonic abnormalities. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:1104–1111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Almond M, Bowley D, Hendrickse C, Roy-Choudhury S, Karandikar SS (2010) Trends in whole colonic imaging. Acta Radiol 51:708

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fisichella VA, Hellstrom M (2010) Survey update on implementation, indications, and technical performance of computed tomography colonography in Sweden. Acta Radiol 51:4–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Svensson MH, Svensson E, Lasson A, Hellstrom M (2002) Patient acceptance of CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy: prospective comparative study in patients with or suspected of having colorectal disease. Radiology 222:337–345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Saunders BP, Bassett P, Vance M, Bartram CI (2003) Acceptance by patients of multidetector CT colonography compared with barium enema examinations, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:913–921

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jensch S, de Vries AH, Peringa J et al (2008) CT colonography with limited bowel preparation: performance characteristics in an increased-risk population. Radiology 247:122–132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ et al (2007) CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med 357:1403–1412

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang 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 

  17. Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY et al (2008) Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med 359:1207–1217

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Pickhardt PJ, Wise SM, Kim DH (2010) Positive predictive value for polyps detected at screening CT colonography. Eur Radiol 20:1651–1656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ozsunar Y, Coskun G, Delibas N, Uz B, Yukselen V (2009) Diagnostic accuracy and tolerability of contrast enhanced CT colonoscopy in symptomatic patients with increased risk for colorectal cancer. Eur J Radiol 71:513–518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. White TJ, Avery GR, Kennan N, Syed AM, Hartley JE, Monson JR (2009) Virtual colonoscopy vs conventional colonoscopy in patients at high risk of colorectal cancer—a prospective trial of 150 patients. Colorectal Dis 11:138–145

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. McArthur DR, Mehrzad H, Patel R et al (2010) CT colonography for synchronous colorectal lesions in patients with colorectal cancer: initial experience. Eur Radiol 20:621–629

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR et al (2005) CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal. Radiology 236:3–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Thomas S, Atchley J, Higginson A (2009) Audit of the introduction of CT colonography for detection of colorectal carcinoma in a non-academic environment and its implications for the national bowel cancer screening programme. Clin Radiol 64:142–147

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Connolly DJ, Traill ZC, Reid HS, Copley SJ, Nolan DJ (2002) The double contrast barium enema: a retrospective single centre audit of the detection of colorectal carcinomas. Clin Radiol 57:29–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Smith GA, O’Dwyer PJ (2001) Sensitivity of double contrast barium enema and colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasms. Surg Endosc 15:649–652

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Halligan S, Altman DG, Taylor SA et al (2005) CT colonography in the detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: systematic review, meta-analysis, and proposed minimum data set for study level reporting. Radiology 237:893–904

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Neri E, Giusti P, Battolla L et al (2002) Colorectal cancer: role of CT colonography in preoperative evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy. Radiology 223:615–619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sabanli M, Balasingam A, Bailey W, Eglinton T, Hider P, Frizelle FA (2010) Computed tomographic colonography in the diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 97:1291–1294

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Leaper M, Johnston MJ, Barclay M, Dobbs BR, Frizelle FA (2004) Reasons for failure to diagnose colorectal carcinoma at colonoscopy. Endoscopy 36:499–503

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. McDonald S, Lyall P, Israel L, Coates R, Frizelle F (2001) Why barium enemas fail to identify colorectal cancers. ANZ J Surg 71:631–633

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Singh H, Nugent Z, Demers AA, Bernstein CN (2010) Rate and predictors of early/missed colorectal cancers after colonoscopy in manitoba: a population-based study. Am J Gastroenterol 105:2588–2596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Bressler B, Paszat LF, Vinden C, Li C, He J, Rabeneck L (2004) Colonoscopic miss rates for right-sided colon cancer: a population-based analysis. Gastroenterology 127:452–456

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Aunt Minnie. SIGGAR trial results a win-win for virtual colonoscopy (2010). Available via http://www.auntminnie.com/index.asp?sec=ser&sub=def&pag=dis&ItemID=92515. Access date 23 Feb 2011

  34. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JH (2003) Electronic cleansing and stool tagging in CT colonography: advantages and pitfalls with primary three-dimensional evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:799–805

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Pickhardt PJ, Lee AD, Taylor AJ et al (2007) Primary 2D versus primary 3D polyp detection at screening CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:1451–1456

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Burling D et al (2004) CT colonography: effect of experience and training on reader performance. Eur Radiol 14:1025–1033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, Meiners RJ et al (2010) Colorectal and extracolonic cancers detected at screening CT colonography in 10,286 asymptomatic adults. Radiology 255:83–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Liedenbaum MH, de Vries AH, van Rijn AF et al (2010) CT colonography with limited bowel preparation for the detection of colorectal neoplasia in an FOBT positive screening population. Abdom Imaging 35:661–668

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kim HJ, Park SH, Pickhardt PJ et al (2010) CT colonography for combined colonic and extracolonic surveillance after curative resection of colorectal cancer. Radiology 257:697–704

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Laghi A, Iannaccone R, Carbone I et al (2002) Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): blinded prospective comparison with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasia. Endoscopy 34:441–446

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Bordesley Green East, Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, B9 5SS, UK

    Sarit Badiani, Silvia Tomas Hernandez, Sharad Karandikar & Shuvro Roy-Choudhury

Authors
  1. Sarit Badiani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Silvia Tomas Hernandez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sharad Karandikar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shuvro Roy-Choudhury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuvro Roy-Choudhury.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Badiani, S., Hernandez, S.T., Karandikar, S. et al. CT Colonography to exclude colorectal cancer in symptomatic patients. Eur Radiol 21, 2029–2038 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2151-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2151-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation