Literature DB >> 14986055

Supine/left decubitus scanning: a valuable alternative to supine/prone scanning in CT colonography.

Stefaan S Gryspeerdt1, Murielle J Herman, Marc A Baekelandt, Bartel G van Holsbeeck, Philippe A Lefere.   

Abstract

The purpose was to evaluate supine/left decubitus as an alternative to supine/prone scanning in computed tomographic colonography (CT colonography). Fifty patients were randomised to supine/prone, another 50 to supine/left decubitus scanning. Patients were scanned using a single-slice CT scanner. The colon was divided into eight segments. Comparisons of distension, breathing artefacts, residus and polyp detection were made between the two groups as well as between the different positions. Adequate distension was found in approximately 85, 97 and 95% of segments in the supine, prone and left decubitus positions, respectively. Combined scanning increased the percentage of adequate distension to 98.5% for prone-supine and 97.7% for left decubitus-supine scanning ( P<0.0005 compared to supine, P=0.001 compared to left decubitus and P=0.046 compared to prone scanning). Absence of residual material was found in approximately 62.7, 69.7 and 64% of segments in the supine, prone and left decubitus positions, respectively. Combined scanning increased this percentage to approximately 99% for both groups. No significant differences towards distension or residual material were found between combined supine-prone or supine-left decubitus scanning. In the supine-prone group, combined scanning additionally revealed four lesions and improved conspicuity in two cases of stalked polyps. In the supine-left decubitus group, combined scanning additionally revealed two lesions and improved conspicuity in one stalked polyp. There were significantly fewer breathing artefacts with left decubitus scanning than prone scanning ( P=0.005). A strong positive correlation was found between breathing artefacts and the age of patients in both patient groups. Colonic distension and preparation is improved by using supine and prone or supine and left decubitus scanning in combination, with a subsequent improved polyp detection. There were no significant differences between the two scanning protocols. Prone scanning, however, is hampered by breathing artefacts, especially in the elderly. Therefore, supine-left decubitus scanning is considered a valuable alternative to supine-prone scanning for the elderly.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14986055     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-004-2264-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  26 in total

Review 1.  Double-contrast barium enema examination technique.

Authors:  S E Rubesin; M S Levine; I Laufer; H Herlinger
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  The effects of distention of the colon during air-contrast barium enema on colonic morphology: anatomic correlation.

Authors:  S E Rubesin; E E Furth; D Rose; M S Levine; I Laufer
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography in the follow-up of colorectal cancer patients: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Andrea Laghi; Riccardo Iannaccone; Emilio Bria; Iacopo Carbone; Luciana Trasatti; Francesca Piacentini; Salvatore Lauro; Aldo Vecchione; Roberto Passariello
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2002-09-25       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Computer-aided diagnosis in virtual colonography via combination of surface normal and sphere fitting methods.

Authors:  Gabriel Kiss; Johan Van Cleynenbreugel; Maarten Thomeer; Paul Suetens; Guy Marchal
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2001-07-12       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Patient acceptance for CT colonography: what is the real issue?

Authors:  M Thomeer; D Bielen; D Vanbeckevoort; S Dymarkowski; A Gevers; P Rutgeerts; M Hiele; E Van Cutsem; G Marchal
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2002-04-24       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  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

7.  Dry preparation for virtual CT colonography with fecal tagging using water-soluble contrast medium: initial results.

Authors:  Didier Bielen; Maarten Thomeer; Dirk Vanbeckevoort; Gabriel Kiss; Frederik Maes; Guy Marchal; Paul Rutgeerts
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2002-11-14       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 8.  Clinical results of CT colonoscopy.

Authors:  J F Bruzzi; A C Moss; H M Fenlon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  CT colonography: colonic distention improved by dual positioning but not intravenous glucagon.

Authors:  Martina M Morrin; Richard J Farrell; Mary T Keogan; Jonathan B Kruskal; Chun-Shan Yam; Vassilios Raptopoulos
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2002-01-15       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  The Glenn Face Down Pillow: an aid to performance of prone radiologic procedures.

Authors:  H Jolles; T J Cole; L Coppage
Journal:  J Thorac Imaging       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.000

View more
  16 in total

1.  Virtual endoscopy of the nasopharynx in the evaluation of its normal anatomy and alterations due to lymphoid hyperplasia: preliminary report.

Authors:  Ignazio Pandolfo; Silvio Mazziotti; Giorgio Ascenti; Sergio Vinci; Ignazio Salamone; Giovanni Colletti; Alfredo Blandino
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-07-09       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Performing an additional decubitus series at CT colonography.

Authors:  Christopher M Buchach; David H Kim; Perry J Pickhardt
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2011-10

3.  Automated mass detection in contrast-enhanced CT colonography: an approach based on contrast and volume.

Authors:  W Luboldt; C Tryon; M Kroll; T L Toussaint; K Holzer; N Hoepffner; T J Vogl
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-10-15       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  CT colonography with fecal tagging after incomplete colonoscopy.

Authors:  S Gryspeerdt; P Lefere; M Herman; R Deman; L Rutgeerts; G Ghillebert; F Baert; M Baekelandt; B Van Holsbeeck
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-02-09       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR): consensus statement on CT colonography.

Authors:  Stuart A Taylor; Andrea Laghi; Philippe Lefere; Steve Halligan; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  [CT colonography: patient preparation and examination technique].

Authors:  P Lefere; S Gryspeerdt; T Mang
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 0.635

7.  Gas insufflation of minimal preparation CT of the colon reduces false-positives.

Authors:  A Slater; M North; M Hart; C Ferrett
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 8.  Computed tomography colonography for the practicing radiologist: A review of current recommendations on methodology and clinical indications.

Authors:  Paola Scalise; Annalisa Mantarro; Francesca Pancrazi; Emanuele Neri
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2016-05-28

Review 9.  Computed tomographic colonography: hope or hype?

Authors:  Otto Schiueh-Tzang Lin
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-02-28       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Polyethylene glycol solution (PEG) plus contrast medium vs PEG alone preparation for CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy in preoperative colorectal cancer staging.

Authors:  Koichi Nagata; Shungo Endo; Tamaki Ichikawa; Keisuke Dasai; Katsuyuki Moriya; Tamio Kushihashi; Shin-ei Kudo
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2006-04-01       Impact factor: 2.571

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.