Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison of time-efficient CT colonography with two- and three-dimensional colonic evaluation for detecting colorectal polyps.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000 Jun; 174(6):1543-9.AA

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We compared the findings of time-efficient CT colonography with complete two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy in detecting colorectal polyps.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Forty-two patients undergoing colonoscopy screening were examined with CT colonography before endoscopy. Data were examined following one of two methods. In method 1, axial 2D data sets were examined in a cine mode. If findings were suggestive of abnormality, focal areas were examined with 3D CT colonography. In method 2, data sets were examined exactly as in method 1, and subsequent to that review, data sets were examined with simultaneous 3D "fly-through" CT colonography (surface-rendered images) and multiplanar reformatted images. The time required to examine CT colonography using each technique was recorded and abnormal findings were documented. Results of methods 1 and 2 were compared with findings on colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Colonoscopy detected 16 polyps in 13 patients (polyp size, 2-10 mm). Ten polyps measured 5 mm or less, five measured between 6 and 9 mm, and one measured 10 mm or more. Using method 1, two of 10 polyps measuring less than 5 mm, three of five polyps measuring between 6 and 9 mm, and one polyp measuring 10 mm were detected. We noted no false-positive polyps. Average evaluation time was 16 min. With method 2, the same polyps were seen as with method 1. No additional polyps were detected, and the average evaluation time was 40 min.

CONCLUSION

Axial 2D CT colonography can be performed quickly and is comparable with complete 2D and 3D CT colonography in detecting colorectal polyps.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Radiology, New York University Medical Center, NY 10016, USA.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

10845478

Citation

Macari, M, et al. "Comparison of Time-efficient CT Colonography With Two- and Three-dimensional Colonic Evaluation for Detecting Colorectal Polyps." AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 174, no. 6, 2000, pp. 1543-9.
Macari M, Milano A, Lavelle M, et al. Comparison of time-efficient CT colonography with two- and three-dimensional colonic evaluation for detecting colorectal polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174(6):1543-9.
Macari, M., Milano, A., Lavelle, M., Berman, P., & Megibow, A. J. (2000). Comparison of time-efficient CT colonography with two- and three-dimensional colonic evaluation for detecting colorectal polyps. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology, 174(6), 1543-9.
Macari M, et al. Comparison of Time-efficient CT Colonography With Two- and Three-dimensional Colonic Evaluation for Detecting Colorectal Polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174(6):1543-9. PubMed PMID: 10845478.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of time-efficient CT colonography with two- and three-dimensional colonic evaluation for detecting colorectal polyps. AU - Macari,M, AU - Milano,A, AU - Lavelle,M, AU - Berman,P, AU - Megibow,A J, PY - 2000/6/14/pubmed PY - 2000/6/24/medline PY - 2000/6/14/entrez SP - 1543 EP - 9 JF - AJR. American journal of roentgenology JO - AJR Am J Roentgenol VL - 174 IS - 6 N2 - OBJECTIVE: We compared the findings of time-efficient CT colonography with complete two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy in detecting colorectal polyps. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients undergoing colonoscopy screening were examined with CT colonography before endoscopy. Data were examined following one of two methods. In method 1, axial 2D data sets were examined in a cine mode. If findings were suggestive of abnormality, focal areas were examined with 3D CT colonography. In method 2, data sets were examined exactly as in method 1, and subsequent to that review, data sets were examined with simultaneous 3D "fly-through" CT colonography (surface-rendered images) and multiplanar reformatted images. The time required to examine CT colonography using each technique was recorded and abnormal findings were documented. Results of methods 1 and 2 were compared with findings on colonoscopy. RESULTS: Colonoscopy detected 16 polyps in 13 patients (polyp size, 2-10 mm). Ten polyps measured 5 mm or less, five measured between 6 and 9 mm, and one measured 10 mm or more. Using method 1, two of 10 polyps measuring less than 5 mm, three of five polyps measuring between 6 and 9 mm, and one polyp measuring 10 mm were detected. We noted no false-positive polyps. Average evaluation time was 16 min. With method 2, the same polyps were seen as with method 1. No additional polyps were detected, and the average evaluation time was 40 min. CONCLUSION: Axial 2D CT colonography can be performed quickly and is comparable with complete 2D and 3D CT colonography in detecting colorectal polyps. SN - 0361-803X UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/10845478/Comparison_of_time_efficient_CT_colonography_with_two__and_three_dimensional_colonic_evaluation_for_detecting_colorectal_polyps_ L2 - http://www.ajronline.org/doi/full/10.2214/ajr.174.6.1741543 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -