PURPOSE: This study evaluated the usefulness of combined polyethylene glycol solution plus contrast medium bowel preparation (PEG-C preparation) followed by dual-contrast computed tomography enema (DCCTE) and conventional colonoscopy. The main purpose of these examinations is the preoperative staging of already known tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred patients with colorectal tumors were alternately allocated to either a polyethylene glycol solution preparation (PEG preparation) group (n=50) or a PEG-C preparation group (n=50) before undergoing conventional colonoscopy and computed tomographic (CT) colonography. After conventional colonoscopy, multidetector row CT scans were performed. Air images were reconstructed for both groups; contrast medium images were additionally reconstructed for the PEG-C preparation group. DCCTE images were a composite of air images and contrast medium images without use of dedicated electronic cleansing software. Quality scores (the presence or absence of blind spots of the colon) were compared between the two groups. RESULTS:Complete tumor images were obtained by DCCTE for all 50 (100%) lesions in the PEG-C preparation group, as compared with only nine of the 50 lesions (18%) in the PEG preparation group (air-contrast CT enema). The overall quality score in the PEG-C preparation group was significantly better than that in the PEG preparation group (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: DCCTE showed the entire colon without blind spots in nearly all patients in the PEG-C preparation group because the areas under residual fluid were reconstructed as contrast medium images. DCCTE and conventional colonoscopy after PEG-C preparation are feasible and safe procedures that can be used for preoperative evaluation in patients with colorectal cancer.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the usefulness of combined polyethylene glycol solution plus contrast medium bowel preparation (PEG-C preparation) followed by dual-contrast computed tomography enema (DCCTE) and conventional colonoscopy. The main purpose of these examinations is the preoperative staging of already known tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred patients with colorectal tumors were alternately allocated to either a polyethylene glycol solution preparation (PEG preparation) group (n=50) or a PEG-C preparation group (n=50) before undergoing conventional colonoscopy and computed tomographic (CT) colonography. After conventional colonoscopy, multidetector row CT scans were performed. Air images were reconstructed for both groups; contrast medium images were additionally reconstructed for the PEG-C preparation group. DCCTE images were a composite of air images and contrast medium images without use of dedicated electronic cleansing software. Quality scores (the presence or absence of blind spots of the colon) were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Complete tumor images were obtained by DCCTE for all 50 (100%) lesions in the PEG-C preparation group, as compared with only nine of the 50 lesions (18%) in the PEG preparation group (air-contrast CT enema). The overall quality score in the PEG-C preparation group was significantly better than that in the PEG preparation group (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS:DCCTE showed the entire colon without blind spots in nearly all patients in the PEG-C preparation group because the areas under residual fluid were reconstructed as contrast medium images. DCCTE and conventional colonoscopy after PEG-C preparation are feasible and safe procedures that can be used for preoperative evaluation in patients with colorectal cancer.
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
Authors: Thomas M Gluecker; C Daniel Johnson; William S Harmsen; Kenneth P Offord; Ann M Harris; Lynn A Wilson; David A Ahlquist Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Michael Macari; Edmund J Bini; Xiaonan Xue; Andrew Milano; Seth S Katz; Daniel Resnick; Hersh Chandarana; Glen Krinsky; Klaus Klingenbeck; Christopher H Marshall; Alec J Megibow Journal: Radiology Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 11.105