Literature DB >> 18852257

Comparison of CT colonography, colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy and faecal occult blood tests for the detection of advanced adenoma in an average risk population.

A Graser1, P Stieber, D Nagel, C Schäfer, D Horst, C R Becker, K Nikolaou, A Lottes, S Geisbüsch, H Kramer, A C Wagner, H Diepolder, J Schirra, H J Roth, D Seidel, B Göke, M F Reiser, F T Kolligs.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This prospective trial was designed to compare the performance characteristics of five different screening tests in parallel for the detection of advanced colonic neoplasia: CT colonography (CTC), colonoscopy (OC), flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), faecal immunochemical stool testing (FIT) and faecal occult blood testing (FOBT).
METHODS: Average risk adults provided stool specimens for FOBT and FIT, and underwent same-day low-dose 64-multidetector row CTC and OC using segmentally unblinded OC as the standard of reference. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated for each single test, and for combinations of FS and stool tests. CTC radiation exposure was measured, and patient comfort levels and preferences were assessed by questionnaire.
RESULTS: 221 adenomas were detected in 307 subjects who completed CTC (mean radiation dose, 4.5 mSv) and OC; 269 patients provided stool samples for both FOBT and FIT. Sensitivities of OC, CTC, FS, FIT and FOBT for advanced colonic neoplasia were 100% (95% CI 88.4% to 100%), 96.7% (82.8% to 99.9%), 83.3% (95% CI 65.3% to 94.4%), 32% (95% CI 14.9% to 53.5) and 20% (95% CI 6.8% to 40.7%), respectively. Combination of FS with FOBT or FIT led to no relevant increase in sensitivity. 12 of 45 advanced adenomas were smaller than 10 mm. 46% of patients preferred CTC and 37% preferred OC (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: High-resolution and low-dose CTC is feasible for colorectal cancer screening and reaches sensitivities comparable with OC for polyps >5 mm. For patients who refuse full bowel preparation and OC or CTC, FS should be preferred over stool tests. However, in cases where stool tests are performed, FIT should be recommended rather than FOBT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18852257     DOI: 10.1136/gut.2008.156448

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gut        ISSN: 0017-5749            Impact factor:   23.059


  115 in total

Review 1.  CT colonography: perforation rates and potential radiation risks.

Authors:  A Berrington de Gonzalez; Kwang Pyo Kim; Judy Yee
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2010-04

2.  Cost-effectiveness of computed tomographic colonography screening for colorectal cancer in the medicare population.

Authors:  Amy B Knudsen; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Carolyn M Rutter; James E Savarino; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Karen M Kuntz; Ann G Zauber
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-07-27       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 3.  How to improve colon cancer screening rates.

Authors:  Luiz Ronaldo Alberti; Diego Paim Carvalho Garcia; Debora Lucciola Coelho; David Correa Alves De Lima; Andy Petroianu
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2015-12-15

Review 4.  CT colonography in the diagnosis and management of colorectal cancer: emphasis on pre- and post-surgical evaluation.

Authors:  Nurhee Hong; Seong Ho Park
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 5.  Colorectal cancer screening--optimizing current strategies and new directions.

Authors:  Ernst J Kuipers; Thomas Rösch; Michael Bretthauer
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 66.675

6.  CT colonography: effect of computer-aided detection of colonic polyps as a second and concurrent reader for general radiologists with moderate experience in CT colonography.

Authors:  Thomas Mang; Luca Bogoni; Vikram X Anand; Dass Chandra; Andrew J Curtin; Anna S Lev-Toaff; Gerardo Hermosillo; Ralph Noah; Vikas Raykar; Marcos Salganicoff; Robert Shaw; Susan Summerton; Rafel F R Tappouni; Helmut Ringel; Michael Weber; Matthias Wolf; Nancy A Obuchowski
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Video capsule colonoscopy in routine clinical practice.

Authors:  Ervin Toth; Diana E Yung; Artur Nemeth; Gabriele Wurm Johansson; Henrik Thorlacius; Anastasios Koulaouzidis
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-05

Review 8.  Computed tomography colonography in 2014: an update on technique and indications.

Authors:  Andrea Laghi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 9.  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

Review 10.  Recommendations on Fecal Immunochemical Testing to Screen for Colorectal Neoplasia: A Consensus Statement by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Douglas J Robertson; Jeffrey K Lee; C Richard Boland; Jason A Dominitz; Francis M Giardiello; David A Johnson; Tonya Kaltenbach; David Lieberman; Theodore R Levin; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-10-18       Impact factor: 10.864

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.