Literature DB >> 12117881

Performance of multidetector computed tomography colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy.

Th Gluecker1, G Dorta, W Keller, P Jornod, R Meuli, P Schnyder.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This was a prospective blinded study to compare computed tomography (CT) colonography, performed with multidetector arrays CT scan (MDCT), with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasia.
METHODS: Fifty patients were examined by MDCT after standard bowel preparation and rectal air insufflation in the supine and prone positions. Data sets were examined by one radiologist and one gastroenterologist blinded to the patient's history and colonoscopy results. Patients subsequently underwent colonoscopy on the same day, which served as the gold standard.
RESULTS: Nine of 11 lesions >10 mm (82%), 5/15 lesions of 6-9 mm (33%), and 1/42 polyps <5 mm (3%) were detected by MDCT colonography. One false positive result for a structure larger than 10 mm was described. Nineteen of 21 patients who had no lesions during conventional colonoscopy were considered free of lesions by MDCT colonography, yielding a per patient specificity of 90%.
CONCLUSION: MDCT colonography provides good data quality and has good sensitivity and specificity for the detection of colonic lesions of 10 mm or more.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12117881      PMCID: PMC1773311          DOI: 10.1136/gut.51.2.207

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gut        ISSN: 0017-5749            Impact factor:   23.059


  27 in total

1.  Virtual colonoscopy: time for some tough questions for radiologists and gastroenterologists.

Authors:  D K Rex
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 10.093

Review 2.  Colonography using multislice CT.

Authors:  P Rogalla; N Meiri; J C Rückert; B Hamm
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.528

Review 3.  Computed tomographic colonography: current and future status for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  J G Fletcher; C D Johnson
Journal:  Semin Roentgenol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 0.800

4.  Virtual colonoscopy--promising, but not ready for widespread use.

Authors:  J H Bond
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1999-11-11       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  President's address. The polyp-cancer sequence in the large bowel.

Authors:  B Morson
Journal:  Proc R Soc Med       Date:  1974-06

6.  Incidental extracolonic findings at CT colonography.

Authors:  A K Hara; C D Johnson; R L MacCarty; T J Welch
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum.

Authors:  T Muto; H J Bussey; B C Morson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1975-12       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients.

Authors:  J G Fletcher; C D Johnson; T J Welch; R L MacCarty; D A Ahlquist; J E Reed; W S Harmsen; L A Wilson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement of CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy).

Authors:  P Pescatore; T Glücker; J Delarive; R Meuli; D Pantoflickova; B Duvoisin; P Schnyder; A L Blum; G Dorta
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 23.059

10.  Growth of colorectal polyps: redetection and evaluation of unresected polyps for a period of three years.

Authors:  B Hofstad; M H Vatn; S N Andersen; H S Huitfeldt; T Rognum; S Larsen; M Osnes
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 23.059

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  [Conventional and virtual colonoscopy].

Authors:  C Ell; T Rabenstein
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 0.743

2.  The virtuosity of virtuality or how real is virtual colonography.

Authors:  H Herfarth; A G Schreyer
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 3.  Multidetector CT of the colon.

Authors:  W Luboldt; N Hoepffner; K Holzer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Screening for colon cancer.

Authors:  J P Heiken
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2006-10-31       Impact factor: 3.909

Review 5.  Colonoscopy vs CT colonography to screen for colorectal neoplasia in average-risk patients.

Authors:  J M Hardacre; J L Ponsky; M E Baker
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Computed tomographic colonography: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2003-10-01

7.  Performance value of high risk factors in colorectal cancer screening in China.

Authors:  Wen Meng; Shan-Rong Cai; Lun Zhou; Qi Dong; Shu Zheng; Su-Zhan Zhang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-12-28       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Computed tomography colonography - reasons for different and false results.

Authors:  Małgorzata Rudzińska; Janusz Rudziński; Krzysztof Leksowski
Journal:  Pol J Radiol       Date:  2010-07

Review 9.  Virtual colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening: current status.

Authors:  Jay P Heiken; Christine M Peterson; Christine O Menias
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2005-11-23       Impact factor: 3.909

Review 10.  Developments in Screening Tests and Strategies for Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Justin L Sovich; Zachary Sartor; Subhasis Misra
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-10-04       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.