Colorectal polyp detection with CT colography: Two-versus three-dimensional techniques: Work in progress

Amy K. Hara, C. Daniel Johnson, Judd E. Reed, Richard Lorne Ehman, Duane M. Ilstrup

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

182 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare detection of colotectal polyps with two-dimensional (2D) computed tomographic (CT) colography only, three-dimensional (3D) CT colography only, and a combination of 2D and 3D CT colography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 11 computer-simulated polyps (1-10 mm) were placed randomly in five identical CT data sets for images of a 72-year-old man's polypfree, rectosigmoid colon. Fifteen CT colographic data sets were produced: five with 2D CT images only, five with 3D CT images only, and five with 2D and 3D CT images. Two radiologists randomly, blindly, and independently evaluated all 15 data sets to detect the simulated polyps. RESULTS: No polyps 2 mm or smaller were detected. No statistically significant differences in the detection of colorectal polyps were found between the three techniques. However, the combination of 2D and 3D CT colography resulted in polyp detection rates that were greater than or equal to those of 2D or 3D CT colography alone. Flat polyps were more difficult to detect than sessile polyps. Five false-positive findings occurred with 2D CT colography. CONCLUSION: A combined display of 2D and 3D CT images likely provides the greatest rate of detection of colorectal polyps.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)49-54
Number of pages6
JournalRadiology
Volume200
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jul 1996

Fingerprint

Polyps
Colon

Keywords

  • Colon, CT, 75.12115
  • Colon, neoplasms, 75.311
  • Computed tomography (CT), image processing
  • Computed tomography (CT), three-dimensional
  • Images, analysis, 75.12115

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Colorectal polyp detection with CT colography : Two-versus three-dimensional techniques: Work in progress. / Hara, Amy K.; Johnson, C. Daniel; Reed, Judd E.; Ehman, Richard Lorne; Ilstrup, Duane M.

In: Radiology, Vol. 200, No. 1, 07.1996, p. 49-54.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e9ded3c910334897abf80b26e6a431e2,
title = "Colorectal polyp detection with CT colography: Two-versus three-dimensional techniques: Work in progress",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To compare detection of colotectal polyps with two-dimensional (2D) computed tomographic (CT) colography only, three-dimensional (3D) CT colography only, and a combination of 2D and 3D CT colography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 11 computer-simulated polyps (1-10 mm) were placed randomly in five identical CT data sets for images of a 72-year-old man's polypfree, rectosigmoid colon. Fifteen CT colographic data sets were produced: five with 2D CT images only, five with 3D CT images only, and five with 2D and 3D CT images. Two radiologists randomly, blindly, and independently evaluated all 15 data sets to detect the simulated polyps. RESULTS: No polyps 2 mm or smaller were detected. No statistically significant differences in the detection of colorectal polyps were found between the three techniques. However, the combination of 2D and 3D CT colography resulted in polyp detection rates that were greater than or equal to those of 2D or 3D CT colography alone. Flat polyps were more difficult to detect than sessile polyps. Five false-positive findings occurred with 2D CT colography. CONCLUSION: A combined display of 2D and 3D CT images likely provides the greatest rate of detection of colorectal polyps.",
keywords = "Colon, CT, 75.12115, Colon, neoplasms, 75.311, Computed tomography (CT), image processing, Computed tomography (CT), three-dimensional, Images, analysis, 75.12115",
author = "Hara, {Amy K.} and Johnson, {C. Daniel} and Reed, {Judd E.} and Ehman, {Richard Lorne} and Ilstrup, {Duane M.}",
year = "1996",
month = "7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "200",
pages = "49--54",
journal = "Radiology",
issn = "0033-8419",
publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Colorectal polyp detection with CT colography

T2 - Two-versus three-dimensional techniques: Work in progress

AU - Hara, Amy K.

AU - Johnson, C. Daniel

AU - Reed, Judd E.

AU - Ehman, Richard Lorne

AU - Ilstrup, Duane M.

PY - 1996/7

Y1 - 1996/7

N2 - PURPOSE: To compare detection of colotectal polyps with two-dimensional (2D) computed tomographic (CT) colography only, three-dimensional (3D) CT colography only, and a combination of 2D and 3D CT colography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 11 computer-simulated polyps (1-10 mm) were placed randomly in five identical CT data sets for images of a 72-year-old man's polypfree, rectosigmoid colon. Fifteen CT colographic data sets were produced: five with 2D CT images only, five with 3D CT images only, and five with 2D and 3D CT images. Two radiologists randomly, blindly, and independently evaluated all 15 data sets to detect the simulated polyps. RESULTS: No polyps 2 mm or smaller were detected. No statistically significant differences in the detection of colorectal polyps were found between the three techniques. However, the combination of 2D and 3D CT colography resulted in polyp detection rates that were greater than or equal to those of 2D or 3D CT colography alone. Flat polyps were more difficult to detect than sessile polyps. Five false-positive findings occurred with 2D CT colography. CONCLUSION: A combined display of 2D and 3D CT images likely provides the greatest rate of detection of colorectal polyps.

AB - PURPOSE: To compare detection of colotectal polyps with two-dimensional (2D) computed tomographic (CT) colography only, three-dimensional (3D) CT colography only, and a combination of 2D and 3D CT colography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 11 computer-simulated polyps (1-10 mm) were placed randomly in five identical CT data sets for images of a 72-year-old man's polypfree, rectosigmoid colon. Fifteen CT colographic data sets were produced: five with 2D CT images only, five with 3D CT images only, and five with 2D and 3D CT images. Two radiologists randomly, blindly, and independently evaluated all 15 data sets to detect the simulated polyps. RESULTS: No polyps 2 mm or smaller were detected. No statistically significant differences in the detection of colorectal polyps were found between the three techniques. However, the combination of 2D and 3D CT colography resulted in polyp detection rates that were greater than or equal to those of 2D or 3D CT colography alone. Flat polyps were more difficult to detect than sessile polyps. Five false-positive findings occurred with 2D CT colography. CONCLUSION: A combined display of 2D and 3D CT images likely provides the greatest rate of detection of colorectal polyps.

KW - Colon, CT, 75.12115

KW - Colon, neoplasms, 75.311

KW - Computed tomography (CT), image processing

KW - Computed tomography (CT), three-dimensional

KW - Images, analysis, 75.12115

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029887512&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029887512&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8657944

AN - SCOPUS:0029887512

VL - 200

SP - 49

EP - 54

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 1

ER -