Gastrointestinal Radiology

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 267–270 | Cite as

Comparison of precontract, postcontrast, and delayed CT scanning for the staging of rectal carcinoma

  • Elisabeth Bech Skriver
  • Michael Bachmann Nielsen
  • Susanne Qvitzau
  • John Christiansen
Article

Abstract

An attempt is made to establish the most appropriate examination procedure for staging rectal carcinoma by computed tomography (CT). Twentytwo patients with rectal carcinoma had CT performed preoperatively. The following three CT sequences were performed in all patients: a precontrast scan with 10-mm slices; a rapid sequence scan with 5-mm slices during bolus injection of contrast medium; and a postcontrast scan after a 10-min delay. Tumor extension and the presence of perirectal lymph nodes were evaluated separately and independently in all three CT sequences according to the TNM classification. All patients had surgical follow-up and the CT scans were compared to the surgical and histopathological findings. There was no significant difference in diagnostic outcome in the three CT procedures. Information obtained by frontal and lateral scout views were compared, and the lateral scout view proved more informative than the frontal scout view. For staging rectal carcinoma, narrow slice scanning and intravenous contrast media are superfluous and should be reserved for special cases. We recommend the use of lateral scout views.

Key words

Rectal carcinoma, CT Contrast media 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baert AL, Roex L, Wilms G, Marchal G, Deschepper C. Computed tomography of the rectum with water as contrast agent.Gastrointest Radiol 1989;14:345–348Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Angelelli G, Macarini L, Lupo L, Caputi-Jambrenghi O, Pannarale O, Memeo V. Rectal carcinoma: CT staging with water as contrast medium.Radiology 1990;177:511–514PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rifkin MD, Ehrlich SM, Marks GM. Staging of rectal carcinoma: prospective comparison of endorectal US and CT.Radiology 1989;170:319–322PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thompson WM, Halvorson RA, Foster WL, Roberts L, Gibbons R. Preoperative and postoperative CT staging of rectosigmoid carcinoma.AJR 1986;146:703–710PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beynon J, Mortensen NJM, Foy DMA, Channer JL, Virjee J, Goddard P. Preoperative assessment of local invasion in rectal cancer: digital examination, endoluminal sonography or computed tomography?Br J Surg 1986;73:1015–1017PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McCarthy SM, Barnes D, Deveney K, Moss AA, Goldberg HI. Detection of recurrent rectosigmoid carcinoma: prospective evaluation of CT and clinical factors.AJR 1985;144:577–579PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nanakawa S, Takahashi M, Kojima R, Takagi K, Fujiyoshi T, Takano M. Preoperative computed tomography staging of rectal carcinoma.Clin Imag 1989;13:29–35Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Solomon A, Michowitz M, Papo J, Yust I. Computed tomographic air enema technique to demonstrate colonic neoplasms.Gastrointest Radiol 1986;11:194–196Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Adalsteinsson B, Glimelius B, Graffman S, Hemmingsson A, Påhlman L. Computed tomography in staging of rectal carcinoma.Acta Radiol 1985;26:45–55Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van Waes PFGM, Koehler PR, Feldberg MAM. Management of rectal carcinoma: impact of computed tomography.AJR 1983;140:1137–1142PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Balthazar EJ, Megibow AJ, Hulnick D, Naidich DP. Carcinoma of the colon: detection and preoperative staging by CT.AJR 1988;150:301–306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Williams NS, Durdey P, Quirke P et al. Pre-operative staging of rectal neoplasm and its impact on clinical management.Br J Surg 1985;72:868–874PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Freeny PC, Marks WM, Ryan JA, Bolen JW. Colorectal carcinoma evaluation with CT: preoperative staging and detection of postoperative recurrence.Radiology 1986;158:347–353PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moss AA. Imaging of colorectal carcinoma.Radiology 1989;170:308–310PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisabeth Bech Skriver
    • 1
  • Michael Bachmann Nielsen
    • 1
  • Susanne Qvitzau
    • 2
  • John Christiansen
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Radiology and UltrasoundUniversity of CopenhagenGlostrupDenmark
  2. 2.Department of PathologyUniversity of CopenhagenGlostrupDenmark
  3. 3.Department of Surgery D, Glostrup HospitalUniversity of CopenhagenGlostrupDenmark

Personalised recommendations