Dose Reduction in Screening Programs: Colon Cancer Screening

  • Thierry N. Boellaard
  • Henk W. Venema
  • Jaap Stoker
Part of the Medical Radiology book series (MEDRAD)


Colorectal cancer is one of the most common causes of cancer-related death in the Western world and screening is the most feasible option to reduce this mortality. Screening is performed by detection of the precursor lesions (adenoma) and early colorectal cancer, followed by appropriate treatment. CT colonography is a multi-detector-row CT technique with high accuracy for the detection of adenomas and colorectal cancer and is therefore an option for screening. It has replaced barium enema as the preferred imaging technique for screening. Although CT colonography has several advantages compared to other screening options, ionizing radiation remains an important drawback. Dose reduction is important to prevent unnecessary radiation exposure and thereby improves the benefit-risk ratio and acceptance of CT colonography as a screening tool. Whether dose reduction is possible depends on several factors, including subject characteristics, the target lesions (intracolonic/extracolonic) and type of oral bowel preparation. Dose reduction can be achieved by adjusting the CT scanner parameters (tube current, tube voltage, pitch and rotation time). Additionally, technical specifications of the CT scanner affect the radiation dose (e.g. number of detector rows and filter type). Newer functionality such as automatic current selection, advanced noise reduction filters and improved reconstruction techniques even enable radiation dose reduction without visual loss of image quality. This chapter gives an overview of CT colonography, factors that influence radiation dose and reviews the current literature on dose reduction in CT colonography.


Bowel Preparation Fecal Occult Blood Test Compute Tomography Colonography Compute Tomography Number Tube Current Modulation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction


Computer-aided detection


CT Colonography Reporting and Data System


Prior image constrained compressed sensing


Kilo voltage






Multi-detector-row CT


Multiplanar reformatting





Thierry Boellaard and Jaap Stoker pay tribute to our co-author Henk Venema who deceased after finalizing this chapter. Henk Venema was pivotal for this work and to our work in general on radiation dose in CT colonography.


  1. ACR (2009) ACR practice guideline for the performance of computed tomography (CT) colonography in adults. ACR practice guideline. Am Coll Radiol pp 1–10Google Scholar
  2. Anupindi S, Perumpillichira J, Jaramillo D, Zalis ME, Israel EJ (2005) Low-dose CT colonography in children: initial experience, technical feasibility, and utility. Pediatr Radiol 35(5):518–524. doi: 10.1007/s00247-004-1394-2 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, Wooldrage K, Hart AR, Northover JM, Parkin DM, Wardle J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J (2010) Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 375(9726):1624–1633. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60551-X PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baum U, Noemayr A, Reissig A, Lell M, Cavallaro A, Kachelriess M, Riedel T, Kalender WA, Bautz W (2003) Improvement of the image quality of MSCT of the pelvis with a raw data-based, multidimensional filter. Rofo 175(11):1572–1576. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-43401 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. BEIR VII (2006) Committee to assess health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation, board on radiation effects research, division of earth and life studies, national research council of the national academies. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2. National Academies Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  6. Brenner DJ, Georgsson MA (2005) Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology 129(1):328–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brenner DJ, Sachs RK (2006) Estimating radiation-induced cancer risks at very low doses: rationale for using a linear no-threshold approach. Radiat Environ Biophys 44(4):253–256. doi: 10.1007/s00411-006-0029-4 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burling D (2010) CT colonography standards. Clin Radiol 65(6):474–480. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2009.12.003 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cai W, Lee JG, Zalis ME, Yoshida H (2011) Mosaic decomposition: an electronic cleansing method for inhomogeneously tagged regions in noncathartic CT colonography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 30(3):559–574. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2010.2087389 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Capunay CM, Carrascosa PM, Bou-Khair A, Castagnino N, Ninomiya I, Carrascosa JM (2005) Low radiation dose multislice CT colonography in children: experience after 100 studies. Eur J Radiol 56(3):398–402. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.06.002 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carmi R, Kafri G, Goshen L, Amin-Spector S, Altman A, Sosna J (2008) A unique noncathartic CT colonography approach by using two-layer dual-energy MDCT and a special algorithmic colon cleansing method. IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Conf RecordGoogle Scholar
  12. Chaparro M, Gisbert JP, Del Campo L, Cantero J, Mate J (2009) Accuracy of computed tomographic colonography for the detection of polyps and colorectal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Digestion 80(1):1–17. doi: 10.1159/000215387 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cody DD, Mahesh M (2007) AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: technologic advances in multidetector CT with a focus on cardiac imaging. Radiographics: a review publication of the radiological society of North America, Inc 27 (6):1829–1837. doi:  10.1148/rg.276075120
  14. Cohnen M, Vogt C, Beck A, Andersen K, Heinen W, vom Dahl S, Aurich V, Haeussinger D, Moedder U (2004) Feasibility of MDCT colonography in ultra-low-dose technique in the detection of colorectal lesions: comparison with high-resolution video colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183(5):1355–1359PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Cunningham D, Atkin W, Lenz HJ, Lynch HT, Minsky B, Nordlinger B, Starling N (2010) Colorectal cancer. Lancet 375(9719):1030–1047. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60353-4 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de González AB, Kim KP, Knudsen AB, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Rutter CM, Smith-Bindman R, Yee J, Kuntz KM, van Ballegooijen M, Zauber AG, Berg CD (2011) Radiation-related cancer risks from CT colonography screening: a risk-benefit analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196(4):816–823. doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.4907 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. de Haan MC, van Gelder RE, Graser A, Bipat S, Stoker J (2011) Diagnostic value of CT-colonography as compared to colonoscopy in an asymptomatic screening population: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 21(8):1747–1763. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2104-8 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. de Vries A, Schoonenberg G, Venema H, Grigorescu S, Peters J, Stoker J (2005) Feasibility of automated detection of colon polyps on simulated ultra low dose CTC datasets. In: Proceedings 91st scientifi c assembly and annual meeting radiological society of North America, Oak Brook, USA, 2005Google Scholar
  19. de Vries AH, Venema HW, Florie J, Nio CY, Stoker J (2008) Influence of tagged fecal material on detectability of colorectal polyps at CT: phantom study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191(4):1101. doi: 10.2214/AJR.07.3740 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Fisichella VA, Bath M, Allansdotter Johnsson A, Jaderling F, Bergsten T, Persson U, Mellingen K, Hellstrom M (2010) Evaluation of image quality and lesion perception by human readers on 3D CT colonography: comparison of standard and low radiation dose. Eur Radiol 20(3):630–639. doi: 10.1007/s00330-009-1601-5 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Flicek KT, Hara AK, Silva AC, Wu Q, Peter MB, Johnson CD (2010) Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: a pilot study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195(1):126–131. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.3855 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Florie J, van Gelder RE, Schutter MP, van Randen A, Venema HW, de Jager S, van der Hulst VP, Prent A, Bipat S, Bossuyt PM, Baak LC, Stoker J (2007) Feasibility study of computed tomography colonography using limited bowel preparation at normal and low-dose levels study. Eur Radiol 17(12):3112–3122. doi: 10.1007/s00330-007-0668-0 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Franaszek M, Summers RM, Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR (2006) Hybrid segmentation of colon filled with air and opacified fluid for CT colonography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 25(3):358–368. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2005.863836 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Friedl AA, Ruhm W (2006) LNT: a never-ending story. Radiat Environ Biophys 44(4):241–244. doi: 10.1007/s00411-006-0028-5 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Graser A, Wintersperger BJ, Suess C, Reiser MF, Becker CR (2006) Dose reduction and image quality in MDCT colonography using tube current modulation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187(3):695–701. doi: 10.2214/AJR.05.0662 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Greess H, Wolf H, Baum U, Kalender WA, Bautz W (1999) Dosage reduction in computed tomography by anatomy-oriented attenuation-based tube-current modulation: the first clinical results. Rofo 170(3):246–250. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1011035 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Halligan S, Altman DG, Taylor SA, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Bartram CI, Atkin W (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(3):893–904. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2373050176 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hara AK, Paden RG, Silva AC, Kujak JL, Lawder HJ, Pavlicek W (2009) Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193(3):764–771. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.2397 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hewitson P, Glasziou P, Watson E, Towler B, Irwig L (2008) Cochrane systematic review of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test (hemoccult): an update. Am J Gastroenterol 103(6):1541–1549. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.01875.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hounsfield GN (1973) Computerized transverse axial scanning (tomography) 1 description of system. Br J Radiol 46(552):1016–1022PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hsieh J (1998) Adaptive streak artifact reduction in computed tomography resulting from excessive X-ray photon noise. Med Phys 25(11):2139–2147PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, Mangiapane F, Piacentini F, Passariello R (2003) Feasibility of ultra-low-dose multislice CT colonography for the detection of colorectal lesions: preliminary experience. Eur Radiol 13(6):1297–1302. doi: 10.1007/s00330-002-1704-8 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, Mangiapane F, Lamazza A, Schillaci A, Sinibaldi G, Murakami T, Sammartino P, Hori M, Piacentini F, Nofroni I, Stipa V, Passariello R (2004) Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 127(5):1300–1311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D (2011) Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 61(2):69–90. doi: 10.3322/caac.20107 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jensch S, van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Lameris JS, Stoker J (2006) Effective radiation doses in CT colonography: results of an inventory among research institutions. Eur Radiol 16(5):981–987. doi: 10.1007/s00330-005-0047-7 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Johnson KT, Johnson CD, Anderson SM, Bruesewitz MR, McCollough CH (2004) CT colonography: determination of optimal CT technique using a novel colon phantom. Abdom Imaging 29(2):173–176. doi: 10.1007/s00261-003-0069-z PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Johnson TR, Krauss B, Sedlmair M, Grasruck M, Bruder H, Morhard D, Fink C, Weckbach S, Lenhard M, Schmidt B, Flohr T, Reiser MF, Becker CR (2007) Material differentiation by dual energy CT: initial experience. Eur Radiol 17(6):1510–1517. doi: 10.1007/s00330-006-0517-6 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jones DG, Shrimpton PC (1991) Survey of CT practice in the UK: normalised organ doses for X–ray computed tomography calculated using Monte Carlo techniques. National Radiological Protection Board, Harwell. Available at:
  39. Kachelriess M, Watzke O, Kalender WA (2001) Generalized multi-dimensional adaptive filtering for conventional and spiral single-slice, multi-slice, and cone-beam CT. Med Phys 28(4):475–490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kalender WA (2005) Computed tomography fundamentals, system technology, image quality, applications. 2nd revised and enlarged edition. Publicis MCD Verlag, MunichGoogle Scholar
  41. Kalender WA, Deak P, Kellermeier M, van Straten M, Vollmar SV (2009) Application- and patient size-dependent optimization of X-ray spectra for CT. Med Phys 36(3):993–1007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, Schmidt B, Westerman BL, Morgan HT, Saini S (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 233(3):649–657. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2333031150 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Karcaaltincaba M, Karaosmanoglu D, Akata D, Senturk S, Ozmen M, Alibek S (2009) Dual energy virtual CT colonoscopy with dual source computed tomography: initial experience. Rofo 181(9):859–862. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1109569 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Leung WK, Winter TC, Hinshaw JL, Gopal DV, Reichelderfer M, Hsu RH, Pfau PR (2007) CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med 357(14):1403–1412. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa070543 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kim SH, Lee JM, Shin CI, Kim HC, Lee JG, Kim JH, Choi JY, Eun HW, Han JK, Lee JY, Choi BI (2008) Effects of spatial resolution and tube current on computer-aided detection of polyps on CT colonographic images: phantom study. Radiology 248(2):492–503. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2482071025 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. La Riviere PJ (2005) Penalized-likelihood sinogram smoothing for low-dose CT. Med Phys 32(6):1676–1683PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Laghi A, Iannaccone R, Mangiapane F, Piacentini F, Iori S, Passariello R (2003) Experimental colonic phantom for the evaluation of the optimal scanning technique for CT colonography using a multidetector spiral CT equipment. Eur Radiol 13(3):459–466. doi: 10.1007/s00330-002-1671-0 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Knudsen AB, Brenner H (2011) Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Epidemiol Rev 33(1):88–100. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxr004 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lawrence EM, Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, Robbins JB (2010) Colorectal polyps: stand-alone performance of computer-aided detection in a large asymptomatic screening population. Radiology 256(3):791–798. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10092292 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lieberman D, Moravec M, Holub J, Michaels L, Eisen G (2008) Polyp size and advanced histology in patients undergoing colonoscopy screening: implications for CT colonography. Gastroenterology 135(4):1100–1105. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.06.083 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Liedenbaum MH, Venema HW, Stoker J (2008) Radiation dose in CT colonography–trends in time and differences between daily practice and screening protocols. Eur Radiol 18(10):2222–2230. doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-0994-x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Liedenbaum MH, de Vries AH, Gouw CI, van Rijn AF, Bipat S, Dekker E, Stoker J (2010a) CT colonography with minimal bowel preparation: evaluation of tagging quality, patient acceptance and diagnostic accuracy in two iodine-based preparation schemes. Eur Radiol 20(2):367–376. doi: 10.1007/s00330-009-1570-8 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Liedenbaum MH, Denters MJ, de Vries AH, van Ravesteijn VF, Bipat S, Vos FM, Dekker E, Stoker J (2010b) Low-fiber diet in limited bowel preparation for CT colonography: influence on image quality and patient acceptance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195(1):W31–W37. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.3572 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Little MP, Wakeford R, Tawn EJ, Bouffler SD, Berrington de González A (2009) Risks associated with low doses and low dose rates of ionizing radiation: why linearity may be (almost) the best we can do. Radiology 251(1):6–12. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2511081686 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lubner MG, Pickhardt PJ, Tang J, Chen GH (2011) Reduced image noise at low-dose multidetector CT of the abdomen with prior image constrained compressed sensing algorithm. Radiology 260(1):248–256. doi: 10.1148/radiol.11101380 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Luz O, Schafer J, Dammann F, Vonthein R, Heuschmid M, Claussen CD (2004) Evaluation of different 16-row CT colonography protocols using a porcine model. Rofo 176(10):1493–1500. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-813407 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Macari M, Bini EJ, Xue X, Milano A, Katz SS, Resnick D, Chandarana H, Krinsky G, Klingenbeck K, Marshall CH, Megibow AJ (2002) Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thin-section low-dose multi-detector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection. Radiology 224(2):383–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mahgerefteh S, Fraifeld S, Blachar A, Sosna J (2009) CT colonography with decreased purgation: balancing preparation, performance, and patient acceptance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193(6):1531–1539. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.2342 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Manduca A, Yu L, Trzasko JD, Khaylova N, Kofler JM, McCollough CM, Fletcher JG (2009) Projection space denoising with bilateral filtering and CT noise modeling for dose reduction in CT. Med Phys 36(11):4911–4919PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler Jr. JM (2006) CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics : a review publication of the radiological society of North America, Inc 26 (2):503–512. doi:  10.1148/rg.262055138
  61. Mulhall BP, Veerappan GR, Jackson JL (2005) Meta-analysis: computed tomographic colonography. Ann Intern Med 142(8):635–650PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Nagata K, Okawa T, Honma A, Endo S, Kudo SE, Yoshida H (2009) Full-laxative versus minimum-laxative fecal-tagging CT colonography using 64-detector row CT: prospective blinded comparison of diagnostic performance, tagging quality, and patient acceptance. Academic Radiol 16(7):780–789. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2008.12.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, Meiners RJ, Wyatt KS, Hanson ME, Barlow DS, Cullen PA, Remtulla RA, Cash BD (2010) Colorectal and extracolonic cancers detected at screening CT colonography in 10, 286 asymptomatic adults. Radiology 255(1):83–88. doi: 10.1148/radiol.09090939 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Halligan S, Marmo R (2011) Colorectal cancer: CT colonography and colonoscopy for detection–systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 259(2):393–405. doi: 10.1148/radiol.11101887 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Prokop M (2003) General principles of MDCT. Eur J Radiol 45(Suppl1):S4–S10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Prokop M (2005) New challenges in MDCT. Eur Radiol 15(Suppl 5):E35–E45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Renker M, Nance JW Jr, Schoepf UJ, O’Brien TX, Zwerner PL, Meyer M, Kerl JM, Bauer RW, Fink C, Vogl TJ, Henzler T (2011) Evaluation of heavily calcified vessels with coronary CT angiography: comparison of iterative and filtered back projection image reconstruction. Radiology 260(2):390–399. doi: 10.1148/radiol.11103574 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rizzo SM, Kalra MK, Schmidt B, Raupach R, Maher MM, Blake MA, Saini S (2005) CT images of abdomen and pelvis: effect of nonlinear three-dimensional optimized reconstruction algorithm on image quality and lesion characteristics. Radiology 237(1):309–315. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2371041879 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Robinson C, Halligan S, Taylor SA, Mallett S, Altman DG (2008) CT colonography: a systematic review of standard of reporting for studies of computer-aided detection. Radiology 246(2):426–433. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2461070121 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Rogalla P, Kloeters C, Hein PA (2009) CT technology overview: 64-slice and beyond. Radiol Clin North Am 47(1):1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.rcl.2008.10.004 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Schilham A, van der Molen AJ, Prokop M, de Jong HW (2010) Overranging at multisection CT: an underestimated source of excess radiation exposure. Radiographics : a review publication of the radiological society of North America, Inc 30 (4):1057–1067. doi:  10.1148/rg.304095167
  72. Sosna J, Morrin MM, Kruskal JB, Lavin PT, Rosen MP, Raptopoulos V (2003) CT colonography of colorectal polyps: a metaanalysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181(6):1593–1598PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Sosna J, Sella T, Sy O, Lavin PT, Eliahou R, Fraifeld S, Libson E (2008) Critical analysis of the performance of double-contrast barium enema for detecting colorectal polyps > or = 6 mm in the era of CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190(2):374–385. doi: 10.2214/AJR.07.2099 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Summers RM, Franaszek M, Miller MT, Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Schindler WR (2005a) Computer-aided detection of polyps on oral contrast-enhanced CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184(1):105–108PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Summers RM, Yao J, Pickhardt PJ, Franaszek M, Bitter I, Brickman D, Krishna V, Choi JR (2005b) Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy computer-aided polyp detection in a screening population. Gastroenterology 129(6):1832–1844. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.08.054 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Sundaram P, Beaulieu CF, Paik DS, Schraedley-Desmond P, Napel S (2003) CT colonography: does improved z resolution help computer-aided polyp detection? Med Phys 30(10):2663–2674PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Bartram CI, Morgan PR, Talbot IC, Fry N, Saunders BP, Khosraviani K, Atkin W (2003) Multi-detector row CT colonography: effect of collimation, pitch, and orientation on polyp detection in a human colectomy specimen. Radiology 229(1):109–118. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2291020561 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tubiana M, Aurengo A, Averbeck D, Masse R (2006) Recent reports on the effect of low doses of ionizing radiation and its dose-effect relationship. Radiat Environ Biophys 44(4):245–251. doi: 10.1007/s00411-006-0032-9 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Tubiana M, Feinendegen LE, Yang C, Kaminski JM (2009) The linear no-threshold relationship is inconsistent with radiation biologic and experimental data. Radiology 251(1):13–22. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2511080671 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Tzedakis A, Damilakis J, Perisinakis K, Stratakis J, Gourtsoyiannis N (2005) The effect of z overscanning on patient effective dose from multidetector helical computed tomography examinations. Med Phys 32(6):1621–1629PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. USPSTF (2008) Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 149(9):627–637Google Scholar
  82. van der Molen AJ, Geleijns J (2007) Overranging in multisection CT: quantification and relative contribution to dose–comparison of four 16-section CT scanners. Radiology 242(1):208–216. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2421051350 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Serlie IW, Nio CY, Determann RM, Tipker CA, Vos FM, Glas AS, Bartelsman JF, Bossuyt PM, Lameris JS, Stoker J (2002) CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: feasibility of dose reduction. Radiology 224(1):25–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Florie J, Nio CY, Serlie IW, Schutter MP, van Rijn JC, Vos FM, Glas AS, Bossuyt PM, Bartelsman JF, Lameris JS, Stoker J (2004) CT colonography: feasibility of substantial dose reduction–comparison of medium to very low doses in identical patients. Radiology 232(2):611–620. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2322031069 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Vogt C, Cohnen M, Beck A, vom Dahl S, Aurich V, Modder U, Haussinger D (2004) Detection of colorectal polyps by multislice CT colonography with ultra-low-dose technique: comparison with high-resolution videocolonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 60(2):201–209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wessling J, Fischbach R, Meier N, Allkemper T, Klusmeier J, Ludwig K, Heindel W (2003) CT colonography: protocol optimization with multi-detector row CT–study in an anthropomorphic colon phantom. Radiology 228(3):753–759. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2283020928 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Winklehner A, Karlo C, Puippe G, Schmidt B, Flohr T, Goetti R, Pfammatter T, Frauenfelder T, Alkadhi H (2011) Raw data-based iterative reconstruction in body CTA: evaluation of radiation dose saving potential. Eur Radiol. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2227-y PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Xiong T, Richardson M, Woodroffe R, Halligan S, Morton D, Lilford RJ (2005) Incidental lesions found on CT colonography: their nature and frequency. Br J Radiol 78(925):22–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Zalis ME, Perumpillichira J, Hahn PF (2004) Digital subtraction bowel cleansing for CT colonography using morphological and linear filtration methods. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 23(11):1335–1343. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2004.826050 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, Dachman AH, Fenlon HM, Ferrucci JT, Glick SN, Laghi A, Macari M, McFarland EG, Morrin MM, Pickhardt PJ, Soto J, Yee J (2005) CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal. Radiology 236(1):3–9. 236/1/3[pii] doi: 10.1148/radiol.2361041926 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thierry N. Boellaard
    • 1
  • Henk W. Venema
    • 2
  • Jaap Stoker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyAcademic Medical Center, University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Departments of Radiology and Medical PhysicsAcademic Medical Center, University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations