Literature DB >> 16967260

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

Stuart A Taylor1, Andrea Laghi, Philippe Lefere, Steve Halligan, Jaap Stoker.   

Abstract

Rapid clinical dissemination of CT colonography (CTC) is occurring in parallel with continued research into technique optimisation and diagnostic performance. A need exists therefore for current guidance as to basic prerequisites for effective clinical implementation. A questionnaire detailing CTC technique, analysis, training and clinical implementation was developed by the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) CTC committee and circulated to all faculty members of previous ESGAR "hands-on" CTC training courses. Responses were collated and a consensus statement produced. Of 27 invited to participate, 24 responded. Reasonable consensus was reached on bowel preparation, colonic distension, patient positioning, use of IV contrast and optimal scan parameters. Both primary 2D and primary 3D analysis were advocated equally, with some evidence that more experienced readers prefer primary 2D. Training was universally recommended, although there was no consensus regarding minimum requirements. CTC was thought superior to barium enema, although recommended for screening only in the presence of validated local experience. There was consensus that polyps 4 mm or less could be ignored assuming agreement from local gastroenterological colleagues. There is increasing consensus amongst European experts as to the current best practice in CTC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 16967260     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-006-0407-y

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


  38 in total

1.  CT colonography practice in the UK: a national survey.

Authors:  D Burling; S Halligan; S A Taylor; S Usiskin; C I Bartram
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 2.350

2.  Consensus on current clinical practice of virtual colonoscopy.

Authors:  Matthew A Barish; Jorge A Soto; Joseph T Ferrucci
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  PRO: Patients with polyps smaller than 1 cm on computed tomographic colonography should be offered colonoscopy and polypectomy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 4.  CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal.

Authors:  Michael E Zalis; Matthew A Barish; J Richard Choi; Abraham H Dachman; Helen M Fenlon; Joseph T Ferrucci; Seth N Glick; Andrea Laghi; Michael Macari; Elizabeth G McFarland; Martina M Morrin; Perry J Pickhardt; Jorge Soto; Judy Yee
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy computer-aided polyp detection in a screening population.

Authors:  Ronald M Summers; Jianhua Yao; Perry J Pickhardt; Marek Franaszek; Ingmar Bitter; Daniel Brickman; Vamsi Krishna; J Richard Choi
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 22.682

6.  Potentially serious adverse events at CT colonography in symptomatic patients: national survey of the United Kingdom.

Authors:  David Burling; Steve Halligan; Andrew Slater; Michael J Noakes; Stuart A Taylor
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-03-28       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  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

8.  Colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography, colonoscopy, and double-contrast barium enema examination: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences.

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

9.  Use of air in double contrast barium enema--is it still acceptable?

Authors:  P N Taylor; D E Beckly
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 2.350

10.  The use of air or CO2 as insufflation agents for double contrast barium enema (DCBE): is there a qualitative difference?

Authors:  D A Scullion; C W Wetton; C Davies; L Whitaker; P J Shorvon
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 2.350

View more
  33 in total

1.  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

2.  Diagnostic accuracy of translucency rendering to differentiate polyps from pseudopolyps at 3D endoluminal CT colonography: a feasibility study.

Authors:  A Guerrisi; D Marin; A Laghi; M Di Martino; F Iafrate; R Iannaccone; C Catalano; R Passariello
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 3.  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

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

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

5.  Measurement of colonic polyps by radiologists and endoscopists: who is most accurate?

Authors:  S Punwani; S Halligan; P Irving; S Bloom; A Bungay; R Greenhalgh; J Godbold; S A Taylor; D G Altman
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-01-04       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  CT colonography: Project of High National Interest No. 2005062137 of the Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR).

Authors:  E Neri; A Laghi; D Regge; P Sacco; T Gallo; F Turini; E Talini; R Ferrari; M Mellaro; M Rengo; S Marchi; D Caramella; C Bartolozzi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2008-10-25       Impact factor: 3.469

7.  Radiation dose in CT colonography--trends in time and differences between daily practice and screening protocols.

Authors:  M H Liedenbaum; H W Venema; J Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  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

Review 9.  Perforation rate in CT colonography: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Davide Bellini; Marco Rengo; Carlo Nicola De Cecco; Franco Iafrate; Cesare Hassan; Andrea Laghi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Primary uncleansed 2D versus primary electronically cleansed 3D in limited bowel preparation CT-colonography. Is there a difference for novices and experienced readers?

Authors:  Ayso H de Vries; Marjolein H Liedenbaum; Shandra Bipat; Roel Truyen; Iwo W O Serlie; Rutger H Cohen; Saskia G C van Elderen; Anneke Heutinck; Oskar Kesselring; Wouter de Monyé; Lambertus te Strake; Tjeerd Wiersma; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-03-20       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.