CT Colonography – Evolution of Methodology and Indications

Česká verzia

Authors: P. Opletal; M. Standara
Authors place of work: Masarykův onkologický ústav, Brno
Published in the journal: Klin Onkol 2012; 25(4): 241-245
Category: Reviews

Summary

Background:
Advances in CT scanners technology and computing in 90s allowed visual reconstruction of hollow organs inner surface. This method which was mainly used for colon wall imaging had to deal with several limitations from the very first years caused by poorly developed methodology of colonic preparation and distension as well as high radiation exposure.

Design:
Aim of the paper is to provide an overview of technical and methodological innovations that can at least partially overcome above mentioned shortcomings. Due to these changes, CT colonography became the recognized method after incomplete or impossible optical colonography. Specific patient subgroups which particularly benefit from this modality and unresolved role of the CT colonography in colorectal cancer screening are also mentioned.

Conclusion:
CT colonography is a relatively new method that can not completely replace optical colonoscopy. Thanks to advances in technology, however, it became a valid diagnostic tool with certain advantages over other imaging or invasive methods. These benefits can be handed over to a patient when the examination is carefully indicated.

Key words:
radiology – tomography, spiral computed – CT colonography – colonoscopy – colorectal neoplasms – mass screening

This study was supported by scientific program of the Czech Ministry of Health:
FUNDIN MZ0MOU2005. This study was also supported by European fond for regional development and budget of the Czech Republic (OP VaVpI – RECAMO, CZ.1.05/2.1.00/03.0101).

The authors declare they have no potential conflicts of interest concerning drugs, products, or services used in the study.

The Editorial Board declares that the manuscript met the ICMJE “uniform requirements” for biomedical papers.

Submitted:
21. 12. 2011

Accepted:
18. 3. 2012

Zdroje

1. Vining DJ, Gelfand DW. Non-invasive colonoscopy using helical CT scanning, 3D reconstruction, and virtual reality. Hawaii, Maui: 23^rd annual meeting, SGR Scientific Program 1994: Abstract 70.

2. Johnson CD, Hara AK, Reed JE. Computed tomographic colonography (Virtual colonoscopy): a new method for detecting colorectal neoplasms. Endoscopy 1997; 29(6): 454–461.

3. Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Welch TJ et al. Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients. Radiology 2000; 216(3): 704–711.

4. Royster AP, Fenlon HM, Clarke PD et al. CT colonoscopy of colorectal neoplasms: two-dimensional and three-dimensional virtual-reality techniques with colonoscopic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169(5): 1237–1242.

5. Valev V, Wang G, Vannier MW. Techniques of CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). Crit Rev Biomed Eng 1999; 27(1–2): 1–25.

6. Sonnenberg A, Delcò F, Bauerfeind P. Is virtual colonoscopy a cost-effective option to screen for colorectal cancer? Am J Gastroenterol 1999; 94(8): 2268–2274.

7. McFarland EG, Brink JA. Helical CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): the challenge that exists between advancing technology and generalizability. Am J Roentgenol 1999; 173(3): 549–559.

8. Liedenbaum MH, Denters MJ, de Vries AH et al. Low-fiber diet in limited bowel preparation for CT colonography: influence on image quality and patient acceptance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195(1): W31–W37.

9. Mahgerefteh S, Fraifeld S, Blachar A et al. CT Colonography with decreased purgation: balancing preparation, performance, and patient acceptance. Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193(6): 1531–1539.

10. Church J, Delaney C. Randomized, controlled trial of carbon dioxide insufflation during colonoscopy. Dis Colon Rectum 2003; 46(3): 322–326.

11. Burling D, Taylor SA, Halligan S et al. Automated insufflation of carbon dioxide for MDCT colonography: distension and patient experience compared with manual insufflation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186(1): 96–103.

12. Behrens C, Stevenson G, Eddy R et al. Effect of intravenous Buscopan on colonic distention during computed tomography colonography. Can Assoc Radiol J 2008; 59(4): 183–190.

13. Hirofuji Y, Aoyama T, Koyama S et al. Evaluation of patient dose for barium enemas and CT colonography in Japan. Br J Radiol 2009; 82(975): 219–227.

14. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Sources and Effects of Ionising Radiation. Report on the effects of atomic radiation to the general assembly, 2000. Medical radiation exposures. New York: UN 2001.

15. Flicek KT, Hara AK, Silva AC et al. Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: a pilot study. Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195(1): 126–131.

16. Dachman AH, Obuchowski NA, Hoffmeister JW et al. Effect of computer-aided detection for CT colonography in a multireader, multicase trial. Radiology 2010; 256(3): 827–835.

17. Robinson C, Halligan S, Iinuma G et al. CT colonography: computer-assisted detection of colorectal cancer. Br J Radiol 2011; 84(1001): 435–440.

18. de Vries AH, Jensch S, Liedenbaum MH et al. Does a computer-aided detection algorithm in a second read paradigm enhance the performance of experienced computed tomography colonography readers in a population of increased risk? Eur Radiol 2009; 19(4): 941–950.

19. Fisichella VA, Jäderling F, Horvath S et al. Computer-aided detection (CAD) as a second reader using perspective filet view at CT colonography: effect on performance of inexperienced readers. Clin Radiol 2009; 64(10): 972–982.

20. Robinson C, Halligan S, Taylor SA et al. CT colonography: a systematic review of standard of reporting for studies of computer-aided detection. Radiology 2008; 246(2): 426–433.

21. AGA Clinical Practice and Economics Committee. Position of the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute on computed tomographic colonography. Gastroenterology 2006; 131(5): 1627–1628.

22. Iafrate F, Hassan C, Zullo A et al. CT colonography with reduced bowel preparation after incomplete colonoscopy in the elderly. Eur Radiol 2008; 18(7): 1385–1395.

23. Yucel C, Lev-Toaff AS, Moussa N et al. CT colonography for incomplete or contraindicated optical colonoscopy in older patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 190(1): 145–150.

24. Sanford MF, Pickhardt PJ. Diagnostic performance of primary 3-dimensional computed tomography colonography in the setting of colonic diverticular disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 4(8): 1039–1047.

25. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin 2008; 58(3): 130–160.

26. Laghi A, Iafrate F, Rengo M et al. Colorectal cancer screening: the role of CT colonography. World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16(32): 3987–3994.

27. Mitka M. Virtual colonoscopy dealt setback with rejection for coverage by Medicare. JAMA 2009; 301(13): 1327–1328.

28. Whitlock EP, Lin JS, Liles E et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: a targeted, updated systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2008; 149(9): 638–658.

29. Pickhardt PJ. Incidence of colonic perforation at CT colonography: review of existing data and implications for screening of asymptomatic adults. Radiology 2006; 239(2): 313–316.

30. Burling D, Halligan S, Slater A et al. Potentially serious adverse events at CT colonography in symptomatic patients: national survey of the United Kingdom. Radiology 2006; 239(2): 464–471.

31. Sosna J, Blachar A, Amitai M et al. Colonic perforation at CT colonography: assessment of risk in a multicenter large cohort. Radiology 2006; 239(2): 457–463.