Perry J Pickhardt1. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin 53792–3252, USA. ppickhardt2@uwhealth.org
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Computed tomography colonography (CTC) continues to mature and evolve as a noninvasive imaging test of the large intestine. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the recent and emerging data that further supports the clinical effectiveness of CTC. RECENT FINDINGS: The diagnostic performance of CTC for detecting colorectal polyps and masses is well established, but its precise clinical role is yet to be determined. Recent data on test performance, patient acceptance, and study technique may help to clarify the role of CTC and accelerate its clinical implementation. SUMMARY: Recent advances and refinements in CTC should help to clarify and expand its clinical role, both as a screening and diagnostic test. High patient acceptance for CTC could lead to increased adherence rates. Ultimately, the complementary nature of CTC and optical colonoscopy should result in improved patient care.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Computed tomography colonography (CTC) continues to mature and evolve as a noninvasive imaging test of the large intestine. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the recent and emerging data that further supports the clinical effectiveness of CTC. RECENT FINDINGS: The diagnostic performance of CTC for detecting colorectal polyps and masses is well established, but its precise clinical role is yet to be determined. Recent data on test performance, patient acceptance, and study technique may help to clarify the role of CTC and accelerate its clinical implementation. SUMMARY: Recent advances and refinements in CTC should help to clarify and expand its clinical role, both as a screening and diagnostic test. High patient acceptance for CTC could lead to increased adherence rates. Ultimately, the complementary nature of CTC and optical colonoscopy should result in improved patient care.
Authors: Ronald M Summers; Jiamin Liu; Jianhua Yao; Linda Brown; J Richard Choi; Perry J Pickhardt Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: C Daniel Johnson; Benjamin A Herman; Mei-Hsiu Chen; Alicia Y Toledano; Jay P Heiken; Abraham H Dachman; Mark D Kuo; Christine O Menias; Bettina Siewert; Jugesh I Cheema; Richard Obregon; Jeff L Fidler; Peter Zimmerman; Karen M Horton; Kevin J Coakley; Revathy B Iyer; Amy K Hara; Robert A Halvorsen; Giovanna Casola; Judy Yee; Meredith Blevins; Lawrence J Burgart; Paul J Limburg; Constantine A Gatsonis Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-02-23 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Brooks D Cash; Kathryn Stamps; Elizabeth G McFarland; Andrew R Spiegel; Sally W Wade Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Esther M Stoop; Margriet C de Haan; Thomas R de Wijkerslooth; Patrick M Bossuyt; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; C Yung Nio; Marc J van de Vijver; Katharina Biermann; Maarten Thomeer; Monique E van Leerdam; Paul Fockens; Jaap Stoker; Ernst J Kuipers; Evelien Dekker Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Michael Macari; Gregory Nevsky; John Bonavita; Danny C Kim; Alec J Megibow; James S Babb Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-04-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Michael E Zalis; Michael A Blake; Wenli Cai; Peter F Hahn; Elkan F Halpern; Imrana G Kazam; Myles Keroack; Cordula Magee; Janne J Näppi; Rocio Perez-Johnston; John R Saltzman; Abhinav Vij; Judy Yee; Hiroyuki Yoshida Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2012-05-15 Impact factor: 25.391