CT colonography

Unraveling the twists and turns

Joel Garland Fletcher, Fargol Booya, C. Daniel Johnson, David Ahlquist

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose of review: The performance of CT colonography has varied widely among published studies to date. This paper reviews differences in indications, populations, technique, and radiologist visualization, to elucidate the key factors that may give rise to disparate results. Recent findings: The role of CT colonography in screening asymptomatic patients is controversial. Studies employing subjects with known neoplasms generally report higher accuracy, while studies employing surveillance subjects report lower accuracy. Technical factors that appear to be associated with higher accuracy include meticulous bowel preparation and inflation, multidetector CT, combined two-and three-dimensional visualization, and radiologist experience and proclivity. Interobserver variability and practice guidelines remain significant issues for this developing technique. Interobserver variability may be reduced in the future by computer-aided detection algorithms or the routine use of skilled second readers. CT colonography is performed routinely for some indications, as it has demonstrated superior performance to noncolonoscopic screening alternatives. Summary: The disparity in results of reported large-scale CT colonography studies in asymptomatic subjects may be explained in part by differences in patient population characteristics, CT technique, and interobserver variability. CT colonography exceeds the performance of nonendoscopic approaches to colorectal cancer screening. Continuing innovation will seek to improve endoluminal visualization, reduce interobserver variability, and improve patient acceptance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)90-98
Number of pages9
JournalCurrent Opinion in Gastroenterology
Volume21
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 2005

Fingerprint

Computed Tomographic Colonography
Observer Variation
Economic Inflation
Population Characteristics
Early Detection of Cancer
Practice Guidelines
Colorectal Neoplasms
Population
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Colon
  • Colon cancer
  • Colorectal screening
  • CT

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

CT colonography : Unraveling the twists and turns. / Fletcher, Joel Garland; Booya, Fargol; Johnson, C. Daniel; Ahlquist, David.

In: Current Opinion in Gastroenterology, Vol. 21, No. 1, 01.2005, p. 90-98.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{0b859aaa002a46c68ff822a98e632e90,
title = "CT colonography: Unraveling the twists and turns",
abstract = "Purpose of review: The performance of CT colonography has varied widely among published studies to date. This paper reviews differences in indications, populations, technique, and radiologist visualization, to elucidate the key factors that may give rise to disparate results. Recent findings: The role of CT colonography in screening asymptomatic patients is controversial. Studies employing subjects with known neoplasms generally report higher accuracy, while studies employing surveillance subjects report lower accuracy. Technical factors that appear to be associated with higher accuracy include meticulous bowel preparation and inflation, multidetector CT, combined two-and three-dimensional visualization, and radiologist experience and proclivity. Interobserver variability and practice guidelines remain significant issues for this developing technique. Interobserver variability may be reduced in the future by computer-aided detection algorithms or the routine use of skilled second readers. CT colonography is performed routinely for some indications, as it has demonstrated superior performance to noncolonoscopic screening alternatives. Summary: The disparity in results of reported large-scale CT colonography studies in asymptomatic subjects may be explained in part by differences in patient population characteristics, CT technique, and interobserver variability. CT colonography exceeds the performance of nonendoscopic approaches to colorectal cancer screening. Continuing innovation will seek to improve endoluminal visualization, reduce interobserver variability, and improve patient acceptance.",
keywords = "Colon, Colon cancer, Colorectal screening, CT",
author = "Fletcher, {Joel Garland} and Fargol Booya and Johnson, {C. Daniel} and David Ahlquist",
year = "2005",
month = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "90--98",
journal = "Current Opinion in Gastroenterology",
issn = "0267-1379",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - CT colonography

T2 - Unraveling the twists and turns

AU - Fletcher, Joel Garland

AU - Booya, Fargol

AU - Johnson, C. Daniel

AU - Ahlquist, David

PY - 2005/1

Y1 - 2005/1

N2 - Purpose of review: The performance of CT colonography has varied widely among published studies to date. This paper reviews differences in indications, populations, technique, and radiologist visualization, to elucidate the key factors that may give rise to disparate results. Recent findings: The role of CT colonography in screening asymptomatic patients is controversial. Studies employing subjects with known neoplasms generally report higher accuracy, while studies employing surveillance subjects report lower accuracy. Technical factors that appear to be associated with higher accuracy include meticulous bowel preparation and inflation, multidetector CT, combined two-and three-dimensional visualization, and radiologist experience and proclivity. Interobserver variability and practice guidelines remain significant issues for this developing technique. Interobserver variability may be reduced in the future by computer-aided detection algorithms or the routine use of skilled second readers. CT colonography is performed routinely for some indications, as it has demonstrated superior performance to noncolonoscopic screening alternatives. Summary: The disparity in results of reported large-scale CT colonography studies in asymptomatic subjects may be explained in part by differences in patient population characteristics, CT technique, and interobserver variability. CT colonography exceeds the performance of nonendoscopic approaches to colorectal cancer screening. Continuing innovation will seek to improve endoluminal visualization, reduce interobserver variability, and improve patient acceptance.

AB - Purpose of review: The performance of CT colonography has varied widely among published studies to date. This paper reviews differences in indications, populations, technique, and radiologist visualization, to elucidate the key factors that may give rise to disparate results. Recent findings: The role of CT colonography in screening asymptomatic patients is controversial. Studies employing subjects with known neoplasms generally report higher accuracy, while studies employing surveillance subjects report lower accuracy. Technical factors that appear to be associated with higher accuracy include meticulous bowel preparation and inflation, multidetector CT, combined two-and three-dimensional visualization, and radiologist experience and proclivity. Interobserver variability and practice guidelines remain significant issues for this developing technique. Interobserver variability may be reduced in the future by computer-aided detection algorithms or the routine use of skilled second readers. CT colonography is performed routinely for some indications, as it has demonstrated superior performance to noncolonoscopic screening alternatives. Summary: The disparity in results of reported large-scale CT colonography studies in asymptomatic subjects may be explained in part by differences in patient population characteristics, CT technique, and interobserver variability. CT colonography exceeds the performance of nonendoscopic approaches to colorectal cancer screening. Continuing innovation will seek to improve endoluminal visualization, reduce interobserver variability, and improve patient acceptance.

KW - Colon

KW - Colon cancer

KW - Colorectal screening

KW - CT

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=13244255664&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=13244255664&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 90

EP - 98

JO - Current Opinion in Gastroenterology

JF - Current Opinion in Gastroenterology

SN - 0267-1379

IS - 1

ER -