CT colonography polyp matching: Differences between experienced readers

Marjolein H. Liedenbaum, Ayso H. Vries, Steve Halligan, Patrick M.M. Bossuyt, Abraham H. Dachman, Evelien Dekker, Jasper Florie, Stefaan S. Gryspeerdt, Sebastiaan Jensch, C. Daniel Johnson, Andrea Laghi, Stuart A. Taylor, Jaap Stoker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate if experienced readers differ when matching polyps shown by both CT colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) and to explore the reasons for discrepancy. Twenty-eight CTC cases with corresponding OC were presented to eight experienced CTC readers. Cases represented a broad spectrum of findings, not completely fulfilling typical matching criteria. In 21 cases there was a single polyp on CTC and OC; in seven there were multiple polyps. Agreement between readers for matching was analyzed. For the 21 single-polyp cases, the number of correct matches per reader varied from 13 to 19. Almost complete agreement between readers was observed in 15 cases (71%), but substantial discrepancy was found for the remaining six (29%) probably due to large perceived differences in polyp size between CT and OC. Readers were able to match between 27 (71%) and 35 (92%) of the 38 CTC detected polyps in the seven cases with multiple polyps. Experienced CTC readers agree to a considerable extent when matching polyps between CTC and subsequent OC, but non-negligible disagreement exists.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1723-1730
Number of pages8
JournalEuropean Radiology
Volume19
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 18 2009

Fingerprint

Computed Tomographic Colonography
Polyps
Colonoscopy

Keywords

  • Colonoscopy
  • Colorectal neoplasia
  • Colorectal polyps
  • CT colonography
  • Polyp matching

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Liedenbaum, M. H., Vries, A. H., Halligan, S., Bossuyt, P. M. M., Dachman, A. H., Dekker, E., ... Stoker, J. (2009). CT colonography polyp matching: Differences between experienced readers. European Radiology, 19(7), 1723-1730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1328-3

CT colonography polyp matching : Differences between experienced readers. / Liedenbaum, Marjolein H.; Vries, Ayso H.; Halligan, Steve; Bossuyt, Patrick M.M.; Dachman, Abraham H.; Dekker, Evelien; Florie, Jasper; Gryspeerdt, Stefaan S.; Jensch, Sebastiaan; Johnson, C. Daniel; Laghi, Andrea; Taylor, Stuart A.; Stoker, Jaap.

In: European Radiology, Vol. 19, No. 7, 18.02.2009, p. 1723-1730.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Liedenbaum, MH, Vries, AH, Halligan, S, Bossuyt, PMM, Dachman, AH, Dekker, E, Florie, J, Gryspeerdt, SS, Jensch, S, Johnson, CD, Laghi, A, Taylor, SA & Stoker, J 2009, 'CT colonography polyp matching: Differences between experienced readers', European Radiology, vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 1723-1730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1328-3
Liedenbaum MH, Vries AH, Halligan S, Bossuyt PMM, Dachman AH, Dekker E et al. CT colonography polyp matching: Differences between experienced readers. European Radiology. 2009 Feb 18;19(7):1723-1730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1328-3
Liedenbaum, Marjolein H. ; Vries, Ayso H. ; Halligan, Steve ; Bossuyt, Patrick M.M. ; Dachman, Abraham H. ; Dekker, Evelien ; Florie, Jasper ; Gryspeerdt, Stefaan S. ; Jensch, Sebastiaan ; Johnson, C. Daniel ; Laghi, Andrea ; Taylor, Stuart A. ; Stoker, Jaap. / CT colonography polyp matching : Differences between experienced readers. In: European Radiology. 2009 ; Vol. 19, No. 7. pp. 1723-1730.
@article{d084a9b4dfb44ea5a86ef4019f40a388,
title = "CT colonography polyp matching: Differences between experienced readers",
abstract = "The purpose of this study was to investigate if experienced readers differ when matching polyps shown by both CT colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) and to explore the reasons for discrepancy. Twenty-eight CTC cases with corresponding OC were presented to eight experienced CTC readers. Cases represented a broad spectrum of findings, not completely fulfilling typical matching criteria. In 21 cases there was a single polyp on CTC and OC; in seven there were multiple polyps. Agreement between readers for matching was analyzed. For the 21 single-polyp cases, the number of correct matches per reader varied from 13 to 19. Almost complete agreement between readers was observed in 15 cases (71{\%}), but substantial discrepancy was found for the remaining six (29{\%}) probably due to large perceived differences in polyp size between CT and OC. Readers were able to match between 27 (71{\%}) and 35 (92{\%}) of the 38 CTC detected polyps in the seven cases with multiple polyps. Experienced CTC readers agree to a considerable extent when matching polyps between CTC and subsequent OC, but non-negligible disagreement exists.",
keywords = "Colonoscopy, Colorectal neoplasia, Colorectal polyps, CT colonography, Polyp matching",
author = "Liedenbaum, {Marjolein H.} and Vries, {Ayso H.} and Steve Halligan and Bossuyt, {Patrick M.M.} and Dachman, {Abraham H.} and Evelien Dekker and Jasper Florie and Gryspeerdt, {Stefaan S.} and Sebastiaan Jensch and Johnson, {C. Daniel} and Andrea Laghi and Taylor, {Stuart A.} and Jaap Stoker",
year = "2009",
month = "2",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1007/s00330-009-1328-3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "1723--1730",
journal = "European Radiology",
issn = "0938-7994",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - CT colonography polyp matching

T2 - Differences between experienced readers

AU - Liedenbaum, Marjolein H.

AU - Vries, Ayso H.

AU - Halligan, Steve

AU - Bossuyt, Patrick M.M.

AU - Dachman, Abraham H.

AU - Dekker, Evelien

AU - Florie, Jasper

AU - Gryspeerdt, Stefaan S.

AU - Jensch, Sebastiaan

AU - Johnson, C. Daniel

AU - Laghi, Andrea

AU - Taylor, Stuart A.

AU - Stoker, Jaap

PY - 2009/2/18

Y1 - 2009/2/18

N2 - The purpose of this study was to investigate if experienced readers differ when matching polyps shown by both CT colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) and to explore the reasons for discrepancy. Twenty-eight CTC cases with corresponding OC were presented to eight experienced CTC readers. Cases represented a broad spectrum of findings, not completely fulfilling typical matching criteria. In 21 cases there was a single polyp on CTC and OC; in seven there were multiple polyps. Agreement between readers for matching was analyzed. For the 21 single-polyp cases, the number of correct matches per reader varied from 13 to 19. Almost complete agreement between readers was observed in 15 cases (71%), but substantial discrepancy was found for the remaining six (29%) probably due to large perceived differences in polyp size between CT and OC. Readers were able to match between 27 (71%) and 35 (92%) of the 38 CTC detected polyps in the seven cases with multiple polyps. Experienced CTC readers agree to a considerable extent when matching polyps between CTC and subsequent OC, but non-negligible disagreement exists.

AB - The purpose of this study was to investigate if experienced readers differ when matching polyps shown by both CT colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) and to explore the reasons for discrepancy. Twenty-eight CTC cases with corresponding OC were presented to eight experienced CTC readers. Cases represented a broad spectrum of findings, not completely fulfilling typical matching criteria. In 21 cases there was a single polyp on CTC and OC; in seven there were multiple polyps. Agreement between readers for matching was analyzed. For the 21 single-polyp cases, the number of correct matches per reader varied from 13 to 19. Almost complete agreement between readers was observed in 15 cases (71%), but substantial discrepancy was found for the remaining six (29%) probably due to large perceived differences in polyp size between CT and OC. Readers were able to match between 27 (71%) and 35 (92%) of the 38 CTC detected polyps in the seven cases with multiple polyps. Experienced CTC readers agree to a considerable extent when matching polyps between CTC and subsequent OC, but non-negligible disagreement exists.

KW - Colonoscopy

KW - Colorectal neoplasia

KW - Colorectal polyps

KW - CT colonography

KW - Polyp matching

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=67349182181&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=67349182181&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00330-009-1328-3

DO - 10.1007/s00330-009-1328-3

M3 - Article

C2 - 19224220

AN - SCOPUS:67349182181

VL - 19

SP - 1723

EP - 1730

JO - European Radiology

JF - European Radiology

SN - 0938-7994

IS - 7

ER -