Literature DB >> 15100110

Virtual colon dissection with CT colonography compared with axial interpretation and conventional colonoscopy: preliminary results.

Hanno Hoppe1, Cristiana Quattropani, Adrian Spreng, Jörg Mattich, Peter Netzer, Hans-Peter Dinkel.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether a new virtual colon dissection 3D visualization technique for CT colonography has a shorter analysis time and better sensitivity for detection of colonic polyps than interpretation of axial CT images. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. CT colonography was performed in 22 patients using 4-MDCT followed by conventional colonoscopy on the same day. The CT colonography data sets were analyzed by virtual colon dissection, which virtually bisects and unfolds the colon along its longitudinal axis to inspect the inner colonic surface for polyps. The same CT data sets were independently evaluated using axial interpretation. All data sets were independently interpreted by two radiologists in a blinded manner.
RESULTS: Conventional colonoscopy revealed 31 colonic lesions in 20 patients. Twenty two of the lesions were smaller than 10 mm; nine were 10 mm or larger. Two of the original 22 patients were excluded, one because of residual stool and fluid and the other because of an impassable stenosing rectal wall cancer. For virtual colon dissection, the per-lesion sensitivity was 42% for observer 1 and 68% for observer 2; for axial interpretation, the respective sensitivities were 48% and 61%. For polyps 10 mm or larger, the respective sensitivities were 67% and 89% for virtual colon dissection and 89% and 100% for axial interpretation. The average time for reconstruction and analysis of virtual colon dissection was 36.8 min versus 29.2 min for axial images. Virtual colon dissection was feasible in both the supine and the prone positions in 45.5% of colonic segments, in either the supine or the prone position in 24.5%, and in neither position in 30% of segments.
CONCLUSION: Although virtual colon dissection may facilitate detection of colonic polyps in isolated cases, its detection rate is not superior to axial interpretation, which is mainly attributable to failed rendering of insufficiently distended colonic segments or regions with residual feces. Virtual colon dissection is also the more time-consuming of the two procedures. With further improvement of path-finding and image segmentation, however, virtual colon dissection has the potential to be a useful interpretation tool for CT colonography.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15100110     DOI: 10.2214/ajr.182.5.1821151

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  12 in total

Review 1.  Improving the accuracy of CTC interpretation: computer-aided detection.

Authors:  Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2010-04

2.  Comparison of diagnostic accuracy and interpretation times for a standard and an advanced 3D visualisation technique in CT colonography.

Authors:  Thomas Mang; Frank T Kolligs; Claus Schaefer; Maxmilian F Reiser; Anno Graser
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-10-03       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  A comparison of primary two- and three-dimensional methods to review CT colonography.

Authors:  Rogier E van Gelder; Jasper Florie; C Yung Nio; Sebastiaan Jensch; Steven W de Jager; Frans M Vos; Henk W Venema; Joep F Bartelsman; Johannes B Reitsma; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Johan S Laméris; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  CT colonography: comparison of a colon dissection display versus 3D endoluminal view for the detection of polyps.

Authors:  Markus S Juchems; Thorsten R Fleiter; Sandra Pauls; Stefan A Schmidt; Hans-Jürgen Brambs; Andrik J Aschoff
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-06-14       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Importance of extracolonic findings at IV contrast medium-enhanced CT colonography versus those at non-enhanced CT colonography.

Authors:  Adrian Spreng; Peter Netzer; Joerg Mattich; Hans-Peter Dinkel; Peter Vock; Hanno Hoppe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-06-18       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  CT colonography: an update.

Authors:  Andrik J Aschoff; Andrea S Ernst; Hans-Juergen Brambs; Markus S Juchems
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-09-25       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  [CT colonography: techniques of visualization and findings].

Authors:  J Wessling; W Heindel
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 0.635

8.  Panoramic endoluminal display with minimal image distortion using circumferential radial ray-casting for primary three-dimensional interpretation of CT colonography.

Authors:  Seung Soo Lee; Seong Ho Park; Jin Kook Kim; Namkug Kim; Jeongjin Lee; Beom Jin Park; Young Jun Kim; Min Woo Lee; Ah Young Kim; Hyun Kwon Ha
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Uni- and bidirectional wide angle CT colonography: effect on missed areas, surface visualization, viewing time and polyp conspicuity.

Authors:  James E East; Brian P Saunders; Darren Boone; David Burling; Steve Halligan; Stuart A Taylor
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-04-15       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Virtual colonoscopy: Utility, impact and overview.

Authors:  Dhakshina Ganeshan; Khaled M Elsayes; David Vining
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2013-03-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.