Abdominal Imaging

, Volume 32, Issue 5, pp 541–551

Computed tomographic colonography: clinical value

  • Philippe Lefere
  • Abraham H. Dachman
  • Stefaan Gryspeerdt
Article

Abstract

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) has the potential to reliably detect polyps in the colon. Its clinical value is accepted for several indications. The main target is screening asymptomatic people for colorectal cancer (CRC). As in large multi-centre trials controversial results were obtained, acceptance of this indication on a large scale is still pending. Agreement exists that in experienced hands screening can be performed with CTC. This emphasizes the importance of adequate and intensive training. Besides this, other problems have to be solved. A low complication profile is mandatory. Perforation rate is very low. Ultra-low dose radiation should be used. When screening large patient cohorts, CTC will need a time-efficient and cost-effective management without too many false positives and additional exploration. Can therefore a cut-off size of polyp detection safely be installed? Is the flat lesion an issue? Can extra-colonic findings be treated efficiently? A positive relationship with the gastro-enterologists will improve the act of screening. Improvements of scanning technique and software with dose reduction, improved 3D visualisation methods and CAD are steps in the good direction. Finally, optimisation of laxative-free CTC could be invaluable in the development of CTC as a screening tool for CRC.

Keywords

CT Colonography Virtual Colonoscopy Colorectal Cancer Screening Polyp 

References

  1. 1.
    Vining DJ, Gelfand DW, Bechthold RE, et al. (1994) Technical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality (abstr) AJR Am J Roentgenol 162(suppl):104Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy PC, et al. (1999) A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps NEJM 341:1496–1502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, et al. (2001) Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients Radiology 219:685–692PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sosna J, Morrin MM, Kruskal JB, et al. (2003) CT colonoography of colorectal polyps: a metaanalysis AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:1593–1598PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mulhall B, Veerappan GR, Jackson JL (2005) Meta-analysis: computed tomographic colonography Ann Intern Med 142:635–650PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Halligan S, Altman DG, Mallett S, 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 237:893–904PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dachman AH, Zalis ME (2004) Quality and consistency in CT colonography and research reporting Radiology 230:319–323PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    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 291:1713–1719PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferrucci J, Barish M, Choi R, et al. (2004) Virtual colonoscopy JAMA 292:431–432PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ferrucci JT, Schroy PC (2004) Virtual colonoscopy: good results and not so good results—why the difference? Gastroenterology 127:1633–1640PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwiecki D, et al. (2005) Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison Lancet 365:305–311PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Doshi T, Rusinak DJ, Halvorsen RA, et al. (2007) Retrospective analysis of sources of error in a large CTC clinical trial. Radiology (in press)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ, et al. (2004) Comparison of the relative sensitivity of CT colonography and double-contrast barium enema for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2:314–321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pickhardt P, Choi JR, Hwan I, et al. (2003) Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults NEJM 349:2191–2200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cash BD, Kim C, Cullen P, et al. (2006) Accuracy of computed tomographic colonography for colorectal cancer screening in asymptomatic individuals (abstr). In: Digestive disease week 2006 annual meeting program. Los Angeles, CA, 20–25 May 2006, p 473Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yee J (2006) ACRIN 6664: the national CT colonography trial. In: Proceedings of 7th international symposium on CT colonography, BostonGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Taylor S (2006) European trials. In: Proceedings of 7th international symposium on CT colonography, BostonGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Graser A, Becker CR, Geisbuesch S, et al. (2007) 64-MDCT colonography, optical colonoscopy and FOBT in a screening population: results from the ``Munich colorectal cancer prevention trial'' (Abstr) European Congress of Radiology, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Taylor S, Laghi A, Lefere P, et al. (2006) European society of gastrointestinal and abdominal radiology (ESGAR): consensus statement on CT colonography. Eur RadiolGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lieberman D (2006) Screening for colorectal cancer in average risk populations Am J Med 119:728–735PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wee CC, McCarthy E, Phillips RS (2005) Factors associated with colon cancer screening: the role of patient factors and physician counselling Prev Med 41:23–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lefere P, Gryspeerdt S, et al. (2004) Laxative-free CT colonography AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:945–948PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Stoker J, et al. (2006) Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review Am J Gastroenterol 101:343–350PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT, et al. (1997) Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas as determined by back-to-back colonoscopies Gastroenterology 112:24–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Barish MA, Soto JA, Ferrucci JT (2005) Consensus on current clinical practice of virtual colonoscopy AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:786–792PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yoshida H, Dachman AH (2005) CAD techniques, challenges, and controversies in computed tomographic colonography Abdom Imaging 30:26–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Halligan S, Taylor S (2007) CT colonography: results and limitations. Eur J Radiol 61:400–408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Soto JA, Barish M, Ferrucci J (2004) CT colonography interpretation: guidelines for training courses (abstr). In: Radiological Society of North America scientific assembly and annual meeting program. Radiological Society of North America, Oak Brook, IllGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Soto JA, Barish MA, Yee J (2005) Reader trainig in CT colonography: how much is enough? Radiology 237:26–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Slater A, Taylor SA, Tam E, et al. (2006) Reader error during CT colonography: causes and implications for training Eur Radiol 16:2275–2283PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    McFarland EG, Pilgram TK, Brink JA, et al. (2002) CT colonography: multiobserver diagnostic performance Radiology 25(2):380–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Silva AC, Wellnitz CV, Hara AK (2006) Three-dimensional virtual dissection at CT colonography: unraveling the colon to search for lesions Radiographics 26:1669–1686PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vos FM, van Gelder RE, Serlie IWO, et al. (2003) Three-dimensional display modes for conventional 3D virtual colonoscopy versus unfolded cube projection Radiology 228:878–885PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Taylor SA, Halligan S, Burling D, et al. (2004) CT colonography: effect of experience and training on reader performance Eur Radiol 14:1025–1033PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bodily KD, Fletcher JG, Engelby T, et al. (2005) Nonradiologists as second readers for Intraluminal findings at CT colonography Acad Radiol 12:67–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    ESGAR CT Colonography Study Group Investigators (2007) Effect of directed training on reader performance for CT colonography: multicenter study Radiology 242:152–161Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D, et al. (2003) Gastrointestinal consortium panel. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale—update based on new evidence Gastroenterology 124:544–560PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rockey C (2006) Colon cancer screening, polyp size, and CT colonography: making sense of it all? Gastroenterology 131:2006–2008PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    O’Brien MJ, Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, et al. (1990) The National Polyp Study Workgroup Gastroenterology 98:371–379PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rex DK, Ransohoff DF, Achkar E (2005) Colonoscopy is justified for any polyp discovered during computed tomographic colonography Am J Gastroenterol 100:1903–1908PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rex DK, Lieberman D (2006) ACG colorectal cancer prevention plan: update on CT-colonography Am J Gastroenterol 101:1410–1413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, et al. (2005) CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal Radiology 236:3–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Macari M, Bini EJ, Xue X, et al. (2002) Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thin-section low-dose multi-detector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection Radiology 224:383–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Johnson KT, Johnson CD, Anderson SM, et al. (2004) CT colonography: determination of optimal CT technique using a novel colon phantom Abd Imaging 29:173–176Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Brenner DJ, Georgsson MA (2005) Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology 129:328–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Jensch S, van Gelder RE, Venema HW (2006) Effective radiation doses in CTC colonography: results of an inventory among research institutions Eur Radiol 16:981–987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    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 229:775–781PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tack D, De Maertelaer V, Gevenois PA (2003) Dose reduction in multidetector CT using attenuation-based online tube current modulation AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:331–334PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    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 187:695–701PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sosna J, Blachar A, Amitai M, et al. (2006) Colonic perforation at CT colonography: assessment of risk in a multicenter large cohort Radiology 239:457–463PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    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 239:464–471PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pickhardt PJ (2006) Incidence of colonic perforation at CT colonography: review of existing data and implication for screening of asymptomatic adults Radiology 239:313–316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Limburg PJ, Fletcher JG (2006) Making sense of CT colonography related complication rates Gastroenterology 131:2023–2024PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Dachman AH (2006) Advice for optimizing colonic distention and minimizing risk of perforation during CT colonography Radiology 239:317–321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Taylor SA, Halligan S, O’Donnell C, et al. (2003) Cardiovascular effects at multi-detector row CT colonography compared with those at conventional endoscopy of the colon Radiology 229:782–790PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, et al. (1996) Randomized study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer Lancet 348:1472–1477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Vijan S, Hwang I, Inadomi J, et al. (2006) The cost-effectiveness of CT colonography in screening for colorectal neoplasia Am J Gastroenterol 101:1–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Hassan C; Zullo A, Laghi A, et al. (2007) Colon cancer prevention in Italy: cost-effectiveness analysis with CT colonography and endoscopy. Digest Liver Dis 39:242–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Gluecker TM, Johnson CD, Wilson LA, et al. (2003) Extracolonic findings at CT colonography: evaluation of prevalence and cost in a screening population Gastroenterology 124:911–916PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Rajapaksa RC, Macari M, Bini EJ (2004) Prevalence and impact of extracolonic findings in patients undergoing CT colonography J Clin Gastroenterol 38:767–771PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Yee J, Kumar NN, Godara S, et al. (2005) Extracolonic abnormalities discovered incidentally at CT colonography in a male population Radiology 236:519–526PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Hara AK, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, et al. (2000) Incidental extracolonic findings at CT colonography. Radiology 215:353–357PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Hellström M, Svensson MH, Larsson A (2004) Extracolonic and incidental findings on CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy) AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:631–638PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Flicker MS, Hazra A, Dachman AH (2007) Extracolonic findings at CT colonography (in press)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Gluecker TM, Johnson CD, Harmsen MS, et al. (2003) Colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography and double contrast barium enema: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences Radiology 227:378–384PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Taylor SA, Halligan S, Saunders BP, et al. (2003) Acceptance of multidetector CT colongraphy compared with barium enema examinations, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:913–921PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Van Gelder RE, Birnie E, Florie J, et al. (2004) CT colonography and colonoscopy: assessment of patient preference in a 5-week follow-up study Radiology 233:328–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Bosworth HB, Rockey DC, Paulson EK, et al. (2006) Prospective comparison of patient experience with colon imaging tests Am J Med 119:701–799Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Iannaccone, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. (2004) Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detedction of colorectal polyps Gastroenterology 127:1300–1311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Rex DK (2000) Virtual colonoscopy: time for some tough questions for radiologists and gastroenterologists Endoscopy 32:260–263PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Van Dam J, Cotton P, Johnson CD, et al. (2004) AGA future trends report: CT colonography Gastroenterology 127:970–984PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Sonnenberg A, Delco F, Bauerfeind P (1999) Is virtual colonopscopy a cost-effective option tozcreen for colorectal cancer Am J Gatsroenterol 94:2268–2274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Rembacken BJ, Fujii T, Cairns A, et al. (2000) Flat and depressed colonic neoplasms: a prospective study of 1000 colonoscopies in the UK Lancet 355:1211–1214PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Dachman AH, Yoshida H (2003) Virtual colonoscopy: past, present, and future Radiol Clin N Am 41:377–393PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Kudo S (1996) Endoscopic diagnosis. In: Kudo S (ed) Early colorectal cancer. Tokyo–New York: Igaku-Shoin, pp 17–47Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Pickhardt PJ, Nugent PA, Choi JR, et al. (2004) Flat colorectal lesions in asymptomatic adults: implications for screening with CT virtual colonoscopy AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1343–1347PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Fidler JL, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, et al. (2002) Detection of flat lesions in the colon with CT colonography Abdom Imaging 27:292–300PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Park SH, Ha HK, Kim AY, et al. (2006) Flat polyps of the colon: detection with 16-MDCT colonography—preliminary results AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1611–1617PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Kim DH, et al. (2006) Screening for colorectal neoplasia with CT colonography: initial experience from the 1st year of coverage by third-party payers Radiology 241:417–425PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Hur C, Gazelle SG, Zalis ME, et al. (2004) An analysis of the potential impact of computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy) on colonoscopy demand Gastroenterology 127:1312–1321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Position of the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) (2006) Institute on CT colonography Gastroenterology 131:1627–1628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Budoff MJ, Cohen MC, Garcia MJ, et al. (2005) ACCF/AHA Clinical competence statement on cardiac imaging with computed tomography and magnetic resonance J Acc 46:383–402Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philippe Lefere
    • 1
  • Abraham H. Dachman
    • 2
  • Stefaan Gryspeerdt
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyStedelijk ZiekenhuisRoeselareBelgium
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations