Literature DB >> 17377027

Characteristics of advanced adenomas detected at CT colonographic screening: implications for appropriate polyp size thresholds for polypectomy versus surveillance.

David H Kim1, Perry J Pickhardt, Andrew J Taylor.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Advanced adenomas are the primary target in colorectal screening. The purpose of this study was to delineate the prevalence and imaging characteristics of advanced adenomas detected at screening CT colonography (CTC) and the rates of invasive carcinoma and high-grade dysplasia for various polyp size categories. These observations may be a basis for formulation of polypectomy thresholds and CTC surveillance strategies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The imaging and pathologic findings for polyps measuring 6 mm or more obtained from a CTC screening population of 3,536 persons during a 32-month period were retrospectively reviewed. From this group, prevalence, size, histologic features, morphologic features, and location of advanced adenomas were tabulated. Advanced adenomas were defined by size (> or = 10 mm) and/or histologic findings (prominent villous component or high-grade dysplasia).
RESULTS: A total of 123 (38.3%) of 321 adenomas measuring 6 mm or more were classified as advanced, the overall prevalence being 3.1% (111 of 3,536 patients). The mean size of advanced adenomas was 16.6 +/- 11.6 mm; most of the lesions (116/123, 94.3%) qualified as advanced on the basis of the size criterion alone. The seven lesions measuring 6-9 mm constituted 3.4% (7/205) of all medium-sized adenomas. The largest percentage (65/123, 52.8%) of the advanced adenomas had tubular histologic features, followed by tubulovillous (50/123, 40.6%), villous (5/123, 4.1%), and serrated (3/123, 2.4%) histologic features. High-grade dysplasia was uncommon (6/123, 4.9%), typically occurring in large lesions. Seven cases of cancer were detected, all lesions measuring 10 mm or more in size. The majority of advanced adenomas were classified as sessile (57/123, 46.3%) or pedunculated (57/123, 46.3%); a small percentage were flat (9/123, 7.3%). Advanced adenomas were located in the proximal colon in 43.9% (54/123) and distal colon in 56.1% (69/123) of the cases.
CONCLUSION: Advanced adenomas were generally large (> or = 10 mm in size); only a small percentage were medium sized (6-9 mm). There was a very low prevalence of high-grade dysplasia and invasive carcinoma in this series, particularly in the medium-sized group of lesions. These findings lend support to the practice of CTC screening in which large polyp size is used as a surrogate measure for the possible presence of advanced histologic features and medium-sized lesions are followed with noninvasive surveillance protocols.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17377027     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.06.0764

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


  33 in total

1.  Virtual colonoscopy vs optical colonoscopy.

Authors:  Zhengrong Liang; Robert Richards
Journal:  Expert Opin Med Diagn       Date:  2010-03-01

2.  Use of computed tomography in the management of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Cher Heng Tan; Revathy Iyer
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2010-05-28

Review 3.  Polyp size measurement at CT colonography: what do we know and what do we need to know?

Authors:  Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  CT Colonography Reporting and Data System (C-RADS): benchmark values from a clinical screening program.

Authors:  B Dustin Pooler; David H Kim; Vu P Lam; Elizabeth S Burnside; Perry J Pickhardt
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Evolution of Screen-Detected Small (6-9 mm) Polyps After a 3-Year Surveillance Interval: Assessment of Growth With CT Colonography Compared With Histopathology.

Authors:  Charlotte J Tutein Nolthenius; Thierry N Boellaard; Margriet C de Haan; C Yung Nio; Maarten G J Thomeer; Shandra Bipat; Alexander D Montauban van Swijndregt; Marc J van de Vijver; Katharina Biermann; Ernst J Kuipers; Evelien Dekker; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 6.  CT colonography for population screening: ready for prime time?

Authors:  Perry J Pickhardt
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 3.199

7.  Computed tomography colonography (virtual colonoscopy): climax of a new era of validation and transition into community practice.

Authors:  Jacob Thomas; Jeffrey Carenza; Elizabeth McFarland
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2008-08

8.  Prevalence of colon polyps detected by colonoscopy screening in asymptomatic black and white patients.

Authors:  David A Lieberman; Jennifer L Holub; Matthew D Moravec; Glenn M Eisen; Dawn Peters; Cynthia D Morris
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-09-24       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Polyp size and advanced histology in patients undergoing colonoscopy screening: implications for CT colonography.

Authors:  David Lieberman; Matthew Moravec; Jennifer Holub; Leann Michaels; Glenn Eisen
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2008-07-03       Impact factor: 22.682

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.