Advertisement

Scheduling, Performing, and Reporting Computed Tomographic Colonography

  • Abraham H. Dachman
Chapter

Abstract

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a practical guide for setting up a computed tomographic colonography (CTC) practice commencing with processing the initial request by a potential patient or clinician, selecting the patient cathartic and tagging agent (these issues are detailed in Chap. 6, “Patient Preparation and Tagging”), training technologists in performing the actual CTC exam (scanning and insufflation), training radiologists in interpreting the exam, and concluding with guidelines for communicating the results.

Keywords

Compute Tomographic Colonography Optical Colonoscopy Scout View Magnesium Citrate Residual Fluid 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Pickhardt PJ. Incidence of colonic perforation at CT colonography: review of existing data and implications for screening of asymptomatic adults. Radiology. 2006;239:313–316.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mahgerefteh S, Fraifeld S, Blachar A, Sosna J. CT colonography with decreased purgation: balancing preparation, performance, and patient acceptance. Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:1531–1539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pickhardt PJ. Screening CT colonography: how I do it. Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:290–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    American College of Radiology, ACR practice guideline for communication of diagnostic imaging findings. In: 2006 Practice Guidelines and Technical Standards. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2006:3–7.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruzzi JF, Moss AC, Brennan DD, Mac-Mathuna P, Fenlon HM. Efficacy of IV Buscopan as a muscle relaxant in CT colonography. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:2264–2270.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pickhardt PJ. Editorial: CTC interpretation by gastroenterologists: feasible but largely impractical, undesirable, and misguided. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:2932–2934.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    American College of Radiology. ACR practice guideline for the performance of computed tomography (CT) colonography in adults. ACR Practice Guideline 2005;Res. 29:295–298.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    American College of Radiology. ACR practice guideline for the performance of computed tomography (CT) colonography in adults. ACR Practice Guideline 2009.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gryspeerdt SS, Herman MJ, Baekelandt MA, van Holsbeeck BG, Lefere PA. Supine/left decubitus scanning: a valuable alternative to supine/prone scanning in CT colonography. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:768–777.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dachman AH. (Editorial) Advice for optimizing colonic distension and minimizing risk of perforation during CT colonography. Radiology. 2006; 239:317–321.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR. Adenomatous polyp obscured by small-caliber rectal catheter at low-dose CT colonography: a rare diagnostic pitfall. Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:1581–1583.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwiecki D, Davis W, et al. Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet. 2005;365:305–311.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, Steinauer-Gebauer AM, Wall SD, McQuaid KR. Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology. 2001;219:685–692.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, Wilson LA, et al. Prospective blinded evaluation of computed tomographic colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology. 2003;125:311–319.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thomeer M, Carbone I, Bosmans H, et al. Stool tagging applied in thin-slice multidetector computed tomography colonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2003;27:132–139.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Macari M, Bini EJ, Jacobs SL, et al. Colorectal polyps and cancers in asymptomatic average-risk patients: evaluation with CT colonography. Radiology. 2004;230:629–636.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fenlon H, Nunes D, Schroy PI, Barish M, Clarke P, Ferrucci J. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:1496–1503.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Welch TJ, et al. Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients. Radiology. 2000;216:704–711.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yee J, Kumar NN, Hung RK, Akerkar GA, Kumar PR, Wall SD. Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography. Radiology. 2003;226:653–661.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lefere PA, Gryspeerdt SS, Dewyspelaere J, Baekelandt M, Van Holsbeeck BG. Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT colonography: initial results polyp detection and patient acceptance. Radiology. 2002;224:393–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sosna J, Blachar A, Amitai M, et al. Colonic perforation at CT colonography: assessment of risk in a multicenter large cohort. Radiology. 2006;239:457–463.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Burling D, Halligan S, Slater A, Noakes M, Taylor SA. Potentially serious adverse events at CT colonography in symptomatic patients: national survey of the United Kingdom. Radiology. 2006;239:464–471.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnson CD, Fletcher JG, MacCarty RL, et al. Effect of slice thickness and primary 2D versus 3D virtual dissection on colorectal lesion detection at CT colonography in 452 asymptomatic adults. Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:672–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Regge D. Accuracy of CT colonography in subjects at increased risk of colorectal carcinoma: a multi-center trial of 1,000 patients. In: Radiology Society of North America. Chicago, IL, 2007.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, et al. CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:1403–1412.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Macari M, Berman P, Dicker M, Milano A, Megibow AJ. Usefulness of CT colonography in patients with incomplete colonoscopy. Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173:561–564.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Harned RK, Consigny PM, Cooper NB, Williams SM, Woltjen AJ. Barium enema examination following biopsy of the rectum or colon. Radiology 1982;145:11–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Morrin MM, Kruskal JB, Farrell RJ, Goldberg SN, McGee JB, Raptopoulos V. Endoluminal CT colonography after an incomplete endoscopic colonoscopy. Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172:913–918.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sosna J, Blachar A, Amitai M, Barmeir E, Peled N, Goldberg SN, Bar-Ziv J. Colonic perforation at CT colonography: assessment of risk in a multicenter large cohort. Radiology. 2006;239:457–463. Epub 2006 Mar 16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pickhardt PH, Kim DH, Taylor AJ. Asymptomatic pneumatosis at CT colonography: A benign self-limited imaging finding distinct from perforation. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:W112–W117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hough DM, Kuntz MA, Fidler JL, et al. Detection of occult colonic perforation before CT colonography after incomplete colonoscopy: perforation rate and use of a low-dose diagnostic scan before CO2 insufflation. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:1077–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D, et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale – Update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology. 2003;124:544–560.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L, et al. Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology. 1997;112:594–642.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ. Characteristics of advanced adenomas detected at CT colonographic screening: implications for appropriate polyp size thresholds for polypectomy versus surveillance. Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188:940–944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Taylor SA, Halligan S, O’Donnell C, et al. Cardiovascular effects at multi-detector row CT colonography compared with those at conventional endoscopy of the colon. Radiology. 2003;229:782–790.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Macari M, Lavelle M, Pedrosa I, et al. Effect of different bowel preparations on residual fluid at CT colonography. Radiology. 2001;218:274–277.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Khurana A, McLean L, Atkinson S, Foulks CJ. The effect of oral sodium phosphate drug products on renal function in adults undergoing bowel endoscopy. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168:593–597.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Markowitz GS, Stokes MB, Radhakrishnan J, D’Agati VD. Acute phosphate nephropathy following oral sodium phosphate bowel purgative: an under recognized cause of chronic renal failure. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005;16:3389–3396.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Russmann S, Lamerato L, Marfatia A, et al. Risk of impaired renal function after colonoscopy: a cohort study in patients receiving either oral sodium phosphate or polyethylene glycol. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:2655–2663.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Hinshaw JL, Taylor AJ, Mukherjee R, Pfau PR. Prospective blinded trial comparing 45-mL and 90-mL doses of oral sodium phosphate for bowel preparation before computed tomographic colonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2007;31:53–58.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Kim DH, Reichelderfer M, Gopal DV, Pfau PR. Screening for colorectal neoplasia with CT colonography: initial experience from the 1st year of coverage by third-party payers. Radiology. 2006;241:417–425.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2191–2200.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:1300–1311.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shinners TJ, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Jones DA, Olsen CH. Patient-controlled room air insufflation versus automated carbon dioxide delivery for CT colonography. Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:1491–1496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Burling D, Taylor SA, Halligan S, et al. Automated insufflation of carbon dioxide for MDCT colonography: distension and patient experience compared with manual insufflation. Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:96–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, et al. CT colonography reporting and data system: A consensus proposal. Radiology2005;236:3–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Meeroff JC, Jorgens J, Isenberg JI. The effect of glucagon on barium-enema examination. Radiology. 1975;115:5–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of Chicago Medical CenterChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations