European Radiology

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 348–358

Comparison of three different iodine-based bowel regimens for CT colonography

  • Delia Campanella
  • Lia Morra
  • Silvia Delsanto
  • Vincenzo Tartaglia
  • Roberto Asnaghi
  • Alberto Bert
  • Emanuele Neri
  • Daniele Regge
Gastrointestinal

DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1553-9

Cite this article as:
Campanella, D., Morra, L., Delsanto, S. et al. Eur Radiol (2010) 20: 348. doi:10.1007/s00330-009-1553-9

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the computed tomographic colonography (CTC) image quality and patient acceptance of three iodine-based faecal tagging bowel preparations in 60 patients undergoing the following regimens: a 2-day regimen of meal-time administration of iodine and phospho-soda (GFPH); a 2-day regimen of meal-time mild laxative, followed by iodine administered 2 h before CTC (SD); and a 2-day regimen of meal-time administration of iodine (GF).

Methods

Two independent radiologists assessed tagging quality; quantitative measures included the tagged stool density, and computer-aided detection (CAD) false-positive rate.

Results

The GFPH and SD regimens provided better subjective quality than GF (p < 0.001). The latter regimen resulted in a higher proportion of insufficiently tagged segments: the measured average stool density was less than 200 HU in 10.7% in all segments vs 3.6% for SD and <0.5% for GFPH, respectively. Insufficient tagging occurred mostly in the ascending colon and the caecum. The CAD false-positive rate increased following the trend: GFPH < SD < GF (p = 0.00012). GFPH was worse tolerated than SD (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Considering preparation quality alone, GFPH was the best regimen, but SD provided the best balance between bowel preparation quality and patient acceptability.

Keywords

CT colonographyFaecal taggingBowel preparationQuality assessmentComputer aided detection

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Delia Campanella
    • 1
  • Lia Morra
    • 2
  • Silvia Delsanto
    • 2
  • Vincenzo Tartaglia
    • 4
  • Roberto Asnaghi
    • 5
  • Alberto Bert
    • 2
  • Emanuele Neri
    • 3
  • Daniele Regge
    • 1
  1. 1.Radiology UnitInstitute for Cancer Research and TreatmentCandioloItaly
  2. 2.im3D S.p.A.TurinItaly
  3. 3.Diagnostic and Interventional RadiologyUniversity of PisaPisaItaly
  4. 4.Presidio Ospedaliero Riunito Ciriè, ASL 4 TorinoCirièItaly
  5. 5.Radiologia, Fondazione Salvatore Maugeri, IRCCSIstituto Scientifico di VerunoVerunoItaly