Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Screening and Surveillance of Colorectal Cancer Using CT Colonography

  • Colon (J Anderson, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion Statement

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common cancer among throughout the world with the highest rates in developed countries such as the USA. There is ample evidence demonstrating the beneficial effects of colorectal cancer screening and, largely thanks to screening initiatives and insurance coverage, epidemiologic analyses show a steady decline in both CRC incidence and mortality rates over the last several decades. However, screening rates for CRC in the US remain low and approximately 1 in 3 adults between the ages of 50 and 75 years has not undergone any form of CRC screening, highlighting the need for additional accurate, minimally invasive, and acceptable screening options. Computed tomography colonography (CTC) has emerged as a viable alternative to existing CRC screening tests and research continues to enhance our knowledge regarding the ability of CTC to play a meaningful role in optimizing CRC screening in areas where it is available. This review highlights recent publications of salient research in the field of CTC. CTC continues to evolve, with lower radiation doses and greater evidence of its ability to identify clinical relevant colonic and extracolonic abnormalities. Recent evidence has bolstered the currently recommended CTC screening interval of 5 years and has reiterated the cost-effectiveness of CTC as a CRC screening examination. Additionally, emerging evidence suggests a role for CTC as a polyp and CRC surveillance modality as well as a preoperative adjunct in patients with established CRC. Data supporting the safety and patient acceptance of CTC also has continued to accumulate and CTC has recently been endorsed as an appropriate test for CRC screening in multiple important guidelines and recommendations. CTC is poised to become an important option in the CRC screening and surveillance arena.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance; •• Of major importance

  1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:87–108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Pub. L. No. 105–33; § 4104 (1997).

  3. Siegel RL, Ward EM, Jemal A. Trends in colorectal cancer incidence rates in the United States by tumor location and stage, 1992-2008. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2012;21:411–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Edwards BK, Ward E, Kohler BA, Eheman C, Zauber AG, Anderson RN, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2006, featuring colorectal cancer trends and impact of interventions (risk factors, screening, and treatment) to reduce future rates. Cancer. 2010;116:544–73.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D, Bond J, Burt R, Ferrucci J, et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology. 2003;124:544–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2013/p1105-colorectal-cancer-screening.html.(2016, August 31)

  7. Taylor DP, Cannon-Albright LA, Sweeney C, Williams MS, Haug PJ, Mitchell JA, et al. Comparison of compliance for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance by colonoscopy based on risk. Genet Med. 2011;13:737–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, Andrews KS, Brooks D, Bond J, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. Gastroenterology. 2008;134:1570–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. •• US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer. JAMA. 2016;315:2564–75. Most recent update of USPSTF position on CRC screening and CRC screening tests

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Meyerhardt JA, Mangu PB, Flynn PJ, Korde L, Loprinzi CL, Minski BD, et al. Follow-up care, surveillance protocol, and secondary prevention measures for survivors of colorectal cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline endorsement. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:4465–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Vining DJ, Gelfand DW, Bechtold RE, Scharling ES, Grishaw EK, Shifrin RY. Technical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;162(Suppl):104.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sato K, Tanaka T, Sato J, Shibata E, Nagai Y, Murono K, et al. Usefulness of preoperative CT colonography for colon cancer. Asian J Surg. 2016; doi:10.1016/j.asjsur.2016.04.002.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ridereau-Zins C, Pilleul F, Gandon Y, Laurant V, et al. CT colonography: why? when? how? Diagn Interv Imaging. 2012;93:2–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Halligan S, Altman DG, Mallett S, Taylor SA, Burling D, Roddie M, et al. Computed tomographic colonography: assessment of radiologist performance with and without computer-aided detection. Gastroenterology. 2006;131:1690–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, Dachman AH, Fenlon HM, Ferucci JT, et al. CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal. Radiology. 2005;236:3–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, Butler JA, Puckett ML, Hildebrandt HA, Wong RK, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2191–200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, Wilson LA, Maccarty RL, Welch TJ, Ilstrup DM, et al. Prospective blinded evaluation of computed tomographic colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology. 2003;125:311–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, Heiken JP, Dachman A, Kuo MD, et al. Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1207–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Regge D, Laudi C, Galatola G, Della Monica P, Bonelli L, Angelelli Get al. Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomographic colonography for the detection of advanced neoplasia in individuals at increased risk of colorectal cancer. JAMA 2009;301(23):2453-2461.

  20. Graser A, Stieber P, Nagel D, Schäfer C, Horst D, Becker CR et al. Comparison of CT colonography, colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy and faecal occult blood tests for the detection of advanced adenoma in an average risk population. Gut 2009;58(2):241-248.

  21. •• Pickhardt PJ, Pooler BD, Mbah I, Weiss JM, Kim DH. Colorectal findings at repeat CT colonography screening after initial CT colonography screening negative for polyps larger than 5 mm. Radiology. 2016;22:160582. First large report of results evaluating serial CTC screening examinations

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Leung WK, Winter TC, Hinshaw JL, et al. CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(14):1403–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. American College of Radiology. ACR practice guideline for the performance of computed tomography (CT) colonography in adults. Practice Guidelines and Technical Standards; Reston, VA: 2009.

  24. • Nagata K, Fujiwara M, Kanazawa H, Mogi T, Iida N, Mitsushima T, et al. Evaluation of dose reduction and image quality in CT colonography: comparison of low-dose CT with iterative reconstruction and routine-dose CT with filtered back projection. Eur Radiol. 2015;25:221–9. Important article showing the feasibility of reduced radiation doses without compromised image quality of CTC

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Serlie IW, Nio CY, Determann RM, Tipker CA, et al. CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: feasibility of dose reduction. Radiology. 2002;224:25–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Macari M, Bini EJ, Xue X, Milano A, Katz SS, Resnick D, et al. Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thin-section low-dose multi-detector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection. Radiology. 2002;224:383–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, Brink JA, Mangiapane F, Trenna S, et al. Detection of colorectal lesions: lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy. Radiology. 2003;229:775–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Kim KP, Yee J. CT colonography: perforation rates and potential radiation risks. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2010 Apr;20(2):279–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Yamamura S, Oda S, Imuta M, Utsunomiya D, Yoshida M, Namimoto T, et al. Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography. Acad Radiol. 2016;23:155–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lambert L, Ourednicek P, Briza J, Giepmans W, Jahoda J, Hruska L, et al. Sub-milliSievert ultralow-dose CT colonography with iterative model reconstruction technique. PeerJ. 4:e1883. doi:10.7717/peerj.1883.

  31. Pickhardt PJ, Hanson ME, Vanness DJ, Lo JY, Kim DH, Taylor AJ, et al. Unsuspected extracolonic findings at screening CT colonography: clinical and economic impact. Radiology. 2008;249:151–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. •• Pooler BD, Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ. Indeterminate but likely unimportant extracolonic findings at screening CT colonography (C-RADS Category E3): Incidence and outcomes data from a clinical screening program. Am J Roentgenol. 2016;9:1–6. Important real-life experience showing low rates and acuity of extracolonic findings over time with surveillance CTC

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pooler BD, Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ. Potentially important extracolonic findings at screening CT colonography: incidence and outcomes data from a clinical screening program. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:313–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Plumb AA, Boone D, Fitzke H, Helbren E, Mallett S, Zhu S, et al. Detection of extracolonic pathologic findings with CT colonography: a discrete choice experiment of perceived benefits versus harms. Radiology. 2014;273:144–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Butterly LF, Chase MP, Pohl H, Fiarman GS. Prevalence of clinically important histology in small adenomas. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:343–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. •• Tutein Nolthenius CJ, Boellaard TN, de Haan MC, Nio CY, Thomeer MG, Bipat S, et al. Evolution of screen-detected small (6-9 mm) polyps after a 3-year surveillance interval: assessment of growth with CT colonography compared with histopathology. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110:1682–90. Landmark article evaluating the natural history of small polyps left in vivo

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, Pooler BD, Hinshaw JL, Barlow D, Jensen D, et al. Assessment of volumetric growth rates of small colorectal polyps with CT colonography: a longitudinal study of natural history. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:711–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Kim DH, Matkowskyj KA, Lubner MG, Hinshaw JL, Munoz Del Rio A, Pooler BD, et al. Serrated polyps at CT colonography: prevalence and characteristics of the serrated polyp spectrum. Radiology. 2016;280:455–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. IJspeert JE, Tutein Nolthenius CJ, Kuipers EJ, van Leerdam ME, Nio CY, Thomeer MG, et al. CT-colonography vs. colonoscopy for detection of high-risk sessile serrated polyps. Am J Gastroenterol. 2016;111:516–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Burling D, Halligan S, Slater A, Noakes MJ, Taylor SA. Potentially adverse events at CT colonography in symptomatic patients: national survey of the United Kingdom. Radiology. 2006;239:464–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Sosna J, Blachar A, Amitai M, Barmeir E, Peled N. Goldberg SNet, al. Colonic perforation at CT colonography: assessment of risk in a multicenter large cohort. Radiology. 2006;239:457–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Pickhardt PJ. Incidence of colonic perforation at CT colonography: review of existing data and implications for screening of asymptomatic adults. Radiology. 2006;239:313–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Waye JD, Lewis BS, Yessayan S. Colonoscopy: a prospective report of complications. J Clin Gastroenterol. 1992;15:347–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Anderson ML, Pasha TM, Leighton JA. Endoscopic perforation of the colon: lessons from a 10-year study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95:3418–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Sieg A, Hachmoeller-Eisenbach U, Eisenbach T. Prospective evaluation of complications in outpatient GI endoscopy: a survey among German gastroenterologists. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;53:620–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Tran DQ, Rosen L, Kim R, Riether RD, Stasik JJ, Khubchandani IT. Actual colonoscopy: what are the risks of perforation? Am J Surg. 2001;67:845–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Korman LY, Overholt BF, Box T, Winker CK. Perforation during colonoscopy in endoscopic ambulatory surgical centers. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;58:554–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Gatto NM, Frucht H, Sundararajan V, Jacobson JS, Grann VR, Neugut AI. Risk of perforation after colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy: a population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:230–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Bowles CJ, Leicester R, Romaya C, Swarbrick E, Williams CB, Epstein O. A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow? Gut. 2004;53:277–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. •• Lara LF, Avalos D, Huynh H, Jimenez-Cantisano B, Padron M, Pimentel R, et al. The safety of same-day CT colonography following incomplete colonoscopy with polypectomy. United European Gastroenterol J. 2015;3:358–63. Very nice study demonstrating safety of same day CTC, even after mucosal biopsy during incomplete colonoscopy

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Gomes M, Aldridge RW, Wylie P, Bell J, Epstein O. Cost-effectiveness analysis of 3-D computerized tomography colonography versus optical colonoscopy for imaging symptomatic gastroenterology patients. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2013;11:107–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Hanly P, Skally M, Fenlon H, Sharp L. Cost-effectiveness of computed tomography colonography in colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28:415–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ. Cost-effectiveness of CT colonography. Radiol Clin N Am. 2013;51:89–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Kriza C, Emmert M, Wahlster P, Niederländer C, Kolominsky-Rabas P. An international review of the main cost-effectiveness drivers of virtual colonography versus conventional colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening: is the tide changing due to adherence? Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:629–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Lucidarme O, Cadi M, Berger G, Taieb J, Poynard T, Grenier P, et al. Cost-effectiveness modeling of colorectal cancer: computed tomography colonography vs colonoscopy or fecal occult blood tests. Eur J Radiol. 2012;8:1413–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Pickhardt PJ. CT colonography: does it satisfy the necessary criteria for a colorectal screening test? Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;8:211–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Pyenson B, Pickhardt PJ, Sawhney TG, Berrios M. Medicare cost of colorectal cancer screening: CT colonography vs. optical colonoscopy. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40:2966–76.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. http://www.acr.org/About-Us/Media-Center/Press-Releases/2015-Press-Releases/20151111-Patient-and-Provider-Groups-Call-on-Congress-to-Pass-Medicare-Virtual-Colonoscopy-Coverage (2016, August 31)

  59. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Hanson ME, Hinshaw JL. CT colonography: performance and program outcome measures in an older screening population. Radiology. 2010;254(2):493–500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Cash BD, Stamps K, McFarland EG, Spiegel AR, Wade SW. Clinical use of CT colonography for colorectal cancer screening in military training facilities and potential impact on HEDIS measures. J Am Coll Radiol. 2013;10:30–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Macari M, Nevsky G, Bonavita J, Kim DC, Megibow AJ, Babb JS. CT colonography in senior versus nonsenior patients: extracolonic findings, recommendations for additional imaging, and polyp prevalence. Radiology. 2011;259:767–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, van Ballegooijen M, Hankey BF, et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:687–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Harford WV, Ahnen DJ, Provenzale D, Sontag SJ, et al. Five-year colon surveillance after screening colonoscopy. Gastroenterology. 2007;133:1077–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Schoenfeld P, Cash B, Flood A, Dobhan R, Eastone J, Coyle W, et al. Colonoscopic screening of average-risk women for colorectal neoplasia. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2061–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ, Giardiello FM, Johnson DA, Levin TR. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2012;143:844–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Lieberman D, Moravec M, Holub J, Michaels L, Eisen G. Polyp size and advanced histology in patients undergoing colonoscopy screening: implications for CT colonography. Gastroenterology. 2008;135:1100–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ. Characteristics of advanced adenomas detected at CT colonographic screening: implications for appropriate polyp size thresholds for polypectomy versus surveillance. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188:940–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Stoop EM, de Haan MC, de Wijkerslooth TR, Bossuyt PM, van Ballegooijen M, Nio CY, et al. Participation and yield of colonoscopy versus non-cathartic CT colonography in population-based screening for colorectal cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:55–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Tutein Nolthenius CJ, Boellaard TN, de Haan MC, Nio CY, Thomeer MG, Bipat S, et al. Computer tomography colonography participation and yield in patients under surveillance for 6-9 mm polyps in a population-based screening trial. Eur Radiol. 2016;26:2762–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Tutein Nolthenius CJ, Boellaard TN, de Haan MC, Nio CY, Thomeer MG, Bipat S, et al. Burden of waiting for surveillance CT colonography in patients with screen-detected 6-9 mm polyps. Eur Radiol. 2016; doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4251-4.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Renehan AG, Egger M, Saunders MP, O’Dwyer ST. Impact on survival of intensive follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ. 2002;324:813.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Jeffery M, Hickey B, Hider P. Follow up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;1:CD002200.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Primrose JN, Perera R, Gray A, Rose P, Fuller A, Corkhill A, et al. Effect of 3 to 5 years of scheduled CEA and CT follow-up to detect recurrence of colorectal cancer: the FACS randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014;311(3):263–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Porté F, Uppara M, Malietzis G, Faiz O, Halligan S, Athanasiou T, et al. CT colonography for surveillance of patients with colorectal cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic efficacy. Eur Radiol. 2016; doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4319-1.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gastroenterology, University of South Alabama, 6000 University Commons, 75 University Blvd S, Mobile, AL, 36688, USA

    Manoj Kumar MD & Brooks D. Cash MD

Authors
  1. Manoj Kumar MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brooks D. Cash MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brooks D. Cash MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Manoj Kumar and Brooks D. Cash each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Colon

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, M., Cash, B.D. Screening and Surveillance of Colorectal Cancer Using CT Colonography. Curr Treat Options Gastro 15, 168–183 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-017-0121-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-017-0121-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation