A Slater1, M Betts, H D'Costa. 1. Department of Radiology, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK. andrewslater99@hotmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine if the introduction of faecal tagging to CT colonography (CTC) made the examination easier to tolerate or reduced the number of false-positives. METHODS: Our department changed bowel preparation for CT colonography from Picolax (Ferring Pharmaceuticals Ltd, London, UK) to Gastrografin (Bracco Diagnostics Inc, Princeton, NJ) only with a modified diet. Questionnaires were given to a subgroup of patients within these cohorts. The numbers of false-positives were compared between two cohorts before and after this change. false-positives were defined as lesions reported on CT that were not confirmed by subsequent endoscopic examination. Polyps were matched if they were in the same or adjacent segments, and were within 5 mm of the reported size. RESULTS: 412 patients were identified from the Picolax cohort, and 116 from the Gastrografin cohort. 62 patients in each group completed questionnaires. Gastrografin produced less diarrhoea; 34% had five or more bowel motions in the previous day and night, compared with 77% for Picolax (p<0.001), although more patients found drinking it unpleasant compared with Picolax (85% reported drinking Picolax as "easy" vs 61% for Gastrografin; p=0.002). Picolax produced more non-diagnostic examinations, although this difference was not statistically significant. There was not a significant reduction in the numbers of false-positives (2 out of 112 for Gastrografin group, 14 out of 389 for the Picolax group; p=0.54). CONCLUSION: Switching from Picolax to Gastrografin as a CTC preparation technique produced less diarrhoea, but did not reduce the number of false-positives.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine if the introduction of faecal tagging to CT colonography (CTC) made the examination easier to tolerate or reduced the number of false-positives. METHODS: Our department changed bowel preparation for CT colonography from Picolax (Ferring Pharmaceuticals Ltd, London, UK) to Gastrografin (Bracco Diagnostics Inc, Princeton, NJ) only with a modified diet. Questionnaires were given to a subgroup of patients within these cohorts. The numbers of false-positives were compared between two cohorts before and after this change. false-positives were defined as lesions reported on CT that were not confirmed by subsequent endoscopic examination. Polyps were matched if they were in the same or adjacent segments, and were within 5 mm of the reported size. RESULTS: 412 patients were identified from the Picolax cohort, and 116 from the Gastrografin cohort. 62 patients in each group completed questionnaires. Gastrografin produced less diarrhoea; 34% had five or more bowel motions in the previous day and night, compared with 77% for Picolax (p<0.001), although more patients found drinking it unpleasant compared with Picolax (85% reported drinking Picolax as "easy" vs 61% for Gastrografin; p=0.002). Picolax produced more non-diagnostic examinations, although this difference was not statistically significant. There was not a significant reduction in the numbers of false-positives (2 out of 112 for Gastrografin group, 14 out of 389 for the Picolax group; p=0.54). CONCLUSION: Switching from Picolax to Gastrografin as a CTC preparation technique produced less diarrhoea, but did not reduce the number of false-positives.
Authors: Perry J Pickhardt; J Richard Choi; Inku Hwang; James A Butler; Michael L Puckett; Hans A Hildebrandt; Roy K Wong; Pamela A Nugent; Pauline A Mysliwiec; William R Schindler Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-12-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael E Zalis; James J Perumpillichira; Cordula Magee; Gavriel Kohlberg; Peter F Hahn Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 11.105
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: Philippe A Lefere; Stefaan S Gryspeerdt; Jef Dewyspelaere; Marc Baekelandt; Bartel G Van Holsbeeck Journal: Radiology Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: C Daniel Johnson; Mei-Hsiu Chen; Alicia Y Toledano; Jay P Heiken; Abraham Dachman; Mark D Kuo; Christine O Menias; Betina Siewert; Jugesh I Cheema; Richard G Obregon; Jeff L Fidler; Peter Zimmerman; Karen M Horton; Kevin Coakley; Revathy B Iyer; Amy K Hara; Robert A Halvorsen; Giovanna Casola; Judy Yee; Benjamin A Herman; Lawrence J Burgart; Paul J Limburg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-09-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Stuart A Taylor; Andrew Slater; David N Burling; Emily Tam; Rebecca Greenhalgh; Louise Gartner; Julia Scarth; Robert Pearce; Paul Bassett; Steve Halligan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2007-04-03 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Min Ju Kim; Seong Ho Park; Seung Soo Lee; Jeong Sik Byeon; Eugene K Choi; Jung Hoon Kim; Yeoung Nam Kim; Ah Young Kim; Hyun Kwon Ha Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2009 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.500