European Radiology

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 940–946

Contrast coating for the surface of flat polyps at CT colonography: a marker for detection

  • David H. Kim
  • J. Louis Hinshaw
  • Meghan G. Lubner
  • Alejandro Munoz del Rio
  • B. Dustin Pooler
  • Perry J. Pickhardt
Gastrointestinal

Abstract

Objectives

To assess the frequency of oral contrast coating of flat polyps, which may promote detection, and influencing factors within a screening CT colonography (CTC) population.

Methods

This was a retrospective, observational study performed at one institution. From 7,426 individuals, 123 patients with 160 flat polyps were extracted. Flat polyps were defined as plaque-like, raised at most 3 mm in height and reviewed for contrast coating. Factors including demographic variables such as age and sex, and polyp variables such as polyp size, location and histology were analysed for effect on coating.

Results

Of 160 flat polyps (mean size 9.4 mm ± 3.6), 78.8 % demonstrated coating. Mean coat thickness was 1.5 mm ± 0.6; 23.8 % (n = 30) demonstrated a thin film of contrast. Large size (≥10 mm) and proximal colonic location (relative to splenic flexure) were predictive variables by univariate logistic regression [OR (odds ratio) 3.4 (CI 1.3–8.9; p = 0.011), 2.0 (CI 1.2–3.5; p = 0.011), respectively]. Adenomas (OR 0.37, CI 0.14–1.02; p = 0.054) and mucosal polyps or venous blebs (OR 0.07, CI 0.02–0.25; p < 0.001) were less likely to coat than serrated/hyperplastic lesions. Age and sex were not predictive for coating (p = 0.417, p = 0.499, respectively).

Conclusions

Surface contrast coating is common for flat polyps at CTC, promoted by large size, proximal location and serrated/hyperplastic histology. Given the difficulty in detection, recognition may aid in flat polyp identification.

Key points

• Oral contrast coats the surface of most flat colorectal polyps at CT colonography.

• Large size, proximal colonic location and serrated/hyperplastic histology increase polyp coating.

• Contrast coating increases diagnostic confidence for flat polyps.

• Contrast coating may help in flat polyp detection at CTC.

Keywords

CT colonography CT Flat polyps Screening 

References

  1. 1.
    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 349:2191–2200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lefere PA, Gryspeerdt SS, Dewyspelaere J, Baekelandt M, Van Holsbeeck BG (2002) Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT colonography: initial results-polyp detection and patient acceptance. Radiology 224:393–403PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    O'Connor SD, Summers RM, Choi JR, Pickhardt PJ (2006) Oral contrast adherence to polyps on CT colonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 30:51–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, Robbins JB (2010) Flat (nonpolypoid) colorectal lesions identified at CT colonography in a US screening population. Acad Radiol 17:784–790PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pickhardt PJ, Nugent PA, Choi JR, Schindler WR (2004) Flat colorectal lesions in asymptomatic adults: implications for screening with CT virtual colonoscopy. Am J Roentgenol 183:1343–1347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sakamoto T, Mitsuzaki K, Utsunomiya D et al (2012) Detection of flat colorectal polyps at screening CT colonography in comparison with conventional polypoid lesions. Acta Radiol 53:714–719PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Soetikno RM, Kaltenbach T, Rouse RV et al (2008) Prevalence of nonpolypoid (flat and depressed) colorectal neoplasms in asymptomatic and symptomatic adults. JAMA 299:1027–1035PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, Pooler BD et al (2013) Assessment of volumetric growth rates of small colorectal polyps with CT colonography: a longitudinal study of natural history. Lancet Oncol 14:711–720PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pickhardt PJ, Lam VP, Weiss JM, Kennedy GD, Kim DH. Carpet lesions detected at CT colonography: clinical, imaging, and pathologic features. Radiology. 2013 Sep 13. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 24029647Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pickhardt PJ, Lee AD, McFarland EG, Taylor AJ (2005) Linear polyp measurement at CT colonography: in vitro and in vivo comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional displays. Radiology 236:872–878PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Nugent PA, Schindler WR (2004) The effect of diagnostic confidence on the probability of optical colonoscopic confirmation of potential polyps detected on CT colonography: prospective assessment in 1,339 asymptomatic adults. Am J Roentgenol 183:1661–1665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim DH, Pooler BD, Weiss JM, Pickhardt PJ (2012) Five year colorectal cancer outcomes in a large negative CT colonography screening cohort. Eur Radiol 22:1488–1494PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Hanson ME, Hinshaw JL (2010) CT colonography: performance and program outcome measures in an older screening population. Radiology 254:493–500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pickhardt PJ (2007) Screening CT colonography: how I do it. Am J Roentgenol 189:290–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Buchach CM, Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ (2011) Performing an additional decubitus series at CT colonography. Abdom Imaging 36:538–544PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    R Development Core Team (2009) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation of Statistical Computing, Vienna, http://www.R-project.org. ISBN 3-900051-07-0Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Park SH, Ha HK, Kim AY et al (2006) Flat polyps of the colon: detection with 16-MDCT colonography - preliminary results. Am J Roentgenol 186:1611–1617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rosty C, Hewett DG, Brown IS, Leggett BA, Whitehall VLJ (2013) Serrated polyps of the large intestine: current understanding of diagnosis, pathogenesis, and clinical management. J Gastroenterol 48:287–302PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jass JR (2007) Classification of colorectal cancer based on correlation of clinical, morphological and molecular features. Histopathology 50:113–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    O'Brien MJ (2007) Hyperplastic and serrated polyps of the colorectum. Gastroenterol Clin N Am 36:947–968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Torlakovic E, Skovlund E, Snover DC, Torlakovic G, Nesland JM (2003) Morphologic reappraisal of serrated colorectal polyps. Am J Surg Pathol 27:65–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Baxter NN, Goldwasser MA, Paszat l, Saskin R, Urbach DR, Rabeneck l (2009) Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med 150:1–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ishigooka S, Nomoto M, Obinata N et al (2012) Evaluation of magnifying colonoscopy in the diagnosis of serrated polyps. World J Gastroenterol 18:4308–4316PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gibson JA, Hahn HP, Shahsafaei A, Odze RD (2011) MUC expression in hyperplastic and serrated colonic polyps: lack of specificity of MUC6. Am J Surg Pathol 35:742–749PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Macari M, Lavelle M, Pedrosa I et al (2001) Effect of different bowel preparations on residual fluid at CT colonography. Radiology 218:274–277PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Conry BG, Jones S, Bartram CI (1987) The effect of oral magnesium-containing bowel preparation agents on mucosal coating by barium-sulfate suspensions. Br J Radiol 60:1215–1219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • David H. Kim
    • 1
  • J. Louis Hinshaw
    • 1
  • Meghan G. Lubner
    • 1
  • Alejandro Munoz del Rio
    • 1
  • B. Dustin Pooler
    • 1
  • Perry J. Pickhardt
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity of Wisconsin Medical SchoolMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations