OBJECTIVE: Frail, elderly and immobile patients frequently have difficulty in tolerating formal colonic investigations. Caecal tumours may account for up to 35% of colonic tumours. Barium enema and colonoscopy have limitations in assessing this region. The aims of this study were to evaluate the accuracy of a minimal preparation CT technique (merely with prolonged oral contrast medium) in identifying caecal carcinomas and to determine helpful radiological signs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The CT technique involved helical acquisition following 2 days of preparation with oral contrast medium. The outcome of 4 years' experience (1995-1998) was reviewed. The gold-standards were pathological and cancer registration records, together with colonoscopy and barium enema where available, with a minimum of 15 months' follow-up. RESULTS: CT correctly identified 27 of 30 caecal carcinomas, and missed three, in a total of 1077 CT studies in 1031 patients (median age 80 years). There were also 21 false-positive cases in which CT incorrectly raised the possibility of a caecal tumour. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) were 90%, 98%, 99% and 56%, respectively. Serosal margin blurring, tumour length, presence of abnormal peri-colic fat and terminal ileal wall thickening were identified as useful radiological signs. CONCLUSIONS: Minimal preparation CT is able to identify caecal carcinomas with fair accuracy. Such evaluation may become important given the increasing population age and evidence of a 'proximal shift' in the site of colonic tumours in the elderly. Copyright 2002 The Royal College of Radiologists.
OBJECTIVE: Frail, elderly and immobile patients frequently have difficulty in tolerating formal colonic investigations. Caecal tumours may account for up to 35% of colonic tumours. Barium enema and colonoscopy have limitations in assessing this region. The aims of this study were to evaluate the accuracy of a minimal preparation CT technique (merely with prolonged oral contrast medium) in identifying caecal carcinomas and to determine helpful radiological signs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The CT technique involved helical acquisition following 2 days of preparation with oral contrast medium. The outcome of 4 years' experience (1995-1998) was reviewed. The gold-standards were pathological and cancer registration records, together with colonoscopy and barium enema where available, with a minimum of 15 months' follow-up. RESULTS: CT correctly identified 27 of 30 caecal carcinomas, and missed three, in a total of 1077 CT studies in 1031 patients (median age 80 years). There were also 21 false-positive cases in which CT incorrectly raised the possibility of a caecal tumour. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) were 90%, 98%, 99% and 56%, respectively. Serosal margin blurring, tumour length, presence of abnormal peri-colic fat and terminal ileal wall thickening were identified as useful radiological signs. CONCLUSIONS: Minimal preparation CT is able to identify caecal carcinomas with fair accuracy. Such evaluation may become important given the increasing population age and evidence of a 'proximal shift' in the site of colonic tumours in the elderly. Copyright 2002 The Royal College of Radiologists.