European Radiology

, Volume 19, Issue 8, pp 1951–1959 | Cite as

Panoramic endoluminal display with minimal image distortion using circumferential radial ray-casting for primary three-dimensional interpretation of CT colonography

  • Seung Soo Lee
  • Seong Ho Park
  • Jin Kook Kim
  • Namkug Kim
  • Jeongjin Lee
  • Beom Jin Park
  • Young Jun Kim
  • Min Woo Lee
  • Ah Young Kim
  • Hyun Kwon Ha


The purpose of this study was to develop a panoramic endoluminal display technique, the band view, which causes minimal image distortion, and to determine its feasibility as a time-efficient primary three-dimensional review method of CT colonography (CTC). Image distortion was compared between the band view and four other three-dimensional review modes using ten 10-mm and ten 20-mm electronically generated polyps. Diagnostic performance and interpretation time were compared between the band view and the conventional endoluminal view by two independent readers in 52 patients who underwent CTC and colonoscopy on the same day. Mean image distortion index values, in which 1 indicates no distortion and the larger value represents greater distortion, were significantly smaller with the band view (1.03 and 1.01 for 10-mm and 20-mm polyps, respectively) than with the filet view (1.65 and 1.55) or the virtual colon dissection (3.27 and 3.85) (P ≤ 0.004). The sensitivity and specificity for detecting adenomatous polyps ≥6 mm did not differ, but the mean interpretation time was significantly shorter with the band view than with the conventional endoluminal view by 1.8 and 4.5 minutes in readers 1 and 2, respectively (P < 0.0001). The band view can be a time-efficient alternative for primary three-dimensional review of CTC.


Colonography Computed tomographic Colonic polyps Three-dimensional image 

Supplementary material

330_2009_1362_MOESM1_ESM.m1v (6.2 mb)
Movie 1A video clip of virtual colon navigation using the band view from the transverse colon to the cecum in a 50-year-old woman with a 13-mm pedunculated tubular adenoma in the hepatic flexure (the same patient as in Fig. 1). (M1V 620 MB).
330_2009_1362_MOESM2_ESM.m1v (4.5 mb)
Movie 2aVirtual colon navigation from the proximal transverse colon to the ascending colon with the band view (a) and with the filet view (b). Each movie clip shows three 10-mm synthetic polyps, located in the inner and outer curvatures of the hepatic flexure and in the ascending colon, respectively. The band view (a) produces less image distortion than the filet view (b). (M1V 4.49 MB).
330_2009_1362_MOESM3_ESM.m1v (3.8 mb)
Movie 2b(M1V 380 MB).


  1. 1.
    Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B et al (2008) 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. CA Cancer J Clin 58:130–160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Park SH, Yee J, Kim SH, Kim YH (2007) Fundamental elements for successful performance of CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). Korean J Radiol 8:264–275PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dachman AH, Lefere P, Gryspeerdt S, Morin M (2007) CT colonography: visualization methods, interpretation, and pitfalls. Radiol Clin North Am 45:347–359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pickhardt PJ (2003) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): comparison of three commercially available systems. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:1599–1606PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pickhardt PJ (2004) Differential diagnosis of polypoid lesions seen at CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). Radiographics 24:1535–1556 discussion 1557–1539PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pickhardt PJ, Lee AD, Taylor AJ et al (2007) Primary 2D versus primary 3D polyp detection at screening CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:1451–1456PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Gopal DV (2006) Surface visualization at 3D endoluminal CT colonography: degree of coverage and implications for polyp detection. Gastroenterology 130:1582–1587PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yasumoto T, Murakami T, Yamamoto H et al (2006) Assessment of two 3D MDCT colonography protocols for observation of colorectal polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:85–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Neri E, Vannozzi F, Vagli P, Bardine A, Bartolozzi C (2006) Time efficiency of CT colonography: 2D vs 3D visualization. Comput Med Imaging Graph 30:175–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carrascosa P, Capunay C, Martin Lopez E, Ulla M, Castiglioni R, Carrascosa J (2007) Multidetector CT colonoscopy: evaluation of the perspective-filet view virtual colon dissection technique for the detection of elevated lesions. Abdom Imaging 32(5):582–588PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hoppe H, Quattropani C, Spreng A, Mattich J, Netzer P, Dinkel HP (2004) Virtual colon dissection with CT colonography compared with axial interpretation and conventional colonoscopy: preliminary results. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:1151–1158PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johnson KT, Johnson CD, Fletcher JG, MacCarty RL, Summers RL (2006) CT colonography using 360-degree virtual dissection: a feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:90–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Juchems MS, Fleiter TR, Pauls S, Schmidt SA, Brambs HJ, Aschoff AJ (2006) CT colonography: comparison of a colon dissection display versus 3D endoluminal view for the detection of polyps. Eur Radiol 16:68–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim SH, Lee JM, Eun HW et al (2007) Two- versus three-dimensional colon evaluation with recently developed virtual dissection software for CT colonography. Radiology 244:852–864PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    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
  16. 16.
    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
  17. 17.
    Zhang Z, Wang G, Brown BP, Vannier MW (2000) Distortion reduction for fast soft straightening of the colon. Acad Radiol 7:506–515PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beaulieu CF, Jeffrey RB Jr., Karadi C, Paik DS, Napel S (1999) Display modes for CT colonography. Part II. Blinded comparison of axial CT and virtual endoscopic and panoramic endoscopic volume-rendered studies. Radiology 212:203–212PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Karadi C, Beaulieu CF, Jeffrey RB Jr., Paik DS, Napel S (1999) Display modes for CT colonography. Part I. Synthesis and insertion of polyps into patient CT data. Radiology 212:195–201PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lee SS, Park SH, Choi EK et al (2007) Colorectal polyps on portal phase contrast-enhanced CT colonography: lesion attenuation and distinction from tagged feces. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:35–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oto A, Gelebek V, Oguz BS et al (2003) CT attenuation of colorectal polypoid lesions: evaluation of contrast enhancement in CT colonography. Eur Radiol 13:1657–1663PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Park SH, Lee SS, Kim JK et al (2008) Volume rendering with color coding of tagged stool during endoluminal fly-through CT colonography: effect on reading efficiency. Radiology 248:1018–1027PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pickhardt PJ, Nugent PA, Choi JR, Schindler WR (2004) Flat colorectal lesions in asymptomatic adults: implications for screening with CT virtual colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1343–1347PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Johnson CD, Fletcher JG, MacCarty RL et al (2007) Effect of slice thickness and primary 2D versus 3D virtual dissection on colorectal lesion detection at CT colonography in 452 asymptomatic adults. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:672–680PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    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. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1661–1665PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Glick SG, Johnson CD, Macari M, Yee J ACR practice guideline for the performance of computed tomography (CT) colonography in adults. ACR Practice Guidelines and Technical Standards 2005–2006:295–299Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Obuchowski NA (2003) Special Topics III: bias. Radiology 229:617–621PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Seung Soo Lee
    • 1
  • Seong Ho Park
    • 1
  • Jin Kook Kim
    • 2
  • Namkug Kim
    • 1
  • Jeongjin Lee
    • 1
  • Beom Jin Park
    • 3
  • Young Jun Kim
    • 4
  • Min Woo Lee
    • 4
    • 5
  • Ah Young Kim
    • 1
  • Hyun Kwon Ha
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology and Research Institute of RadiologyUniversity of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical CenterSeoulKorea
  2. 2.INFINITT Co., Ltd.SeoulKorea
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyKorea University College of MedicineSeoulKorea
  4. 4.Department of RadiologyKonkuk University School of Medicine, Konkuk University HospitalSeoulKorea
  5. 5.Department of RadiologySamsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of MedicineSeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations