"skipMainNavigation"
Search
Quick Search in Journals
Quick Search anywhere
Advanced Search
Radiology
Menu
Previous
Next
Original Research

CT Colonography in 546 Patients with Incomplete Colonoscopy1

Published Online:Aug 1 2007https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2442060837

Abstract

Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate the positive predictive value (PPV) of computed tomographic (CT) colonography performed in patients who were referred for further examination after incomplete colonoscopy.

Materials and Methods: This HIPAA-compliant retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was waived. We identified 546 consecutive patients (mean age, 64.1 years; 401 [73.4%] women) who underwent CT colonography after incomplete colonoscopy between November 1999 and December 2002. A retrospective chart review was performed if CT colonography depicted endoscopically nonvisualized lesions 6 mm or greater in diameter. Repeat colonoscopy rate, endoluminal findings, and PPV of CT colonography were determined. Subsequent colonoscopic findings were used as the reference standard.

Results: In 72 (13.2%) patients, CT colonography depicted 88 endoscopically nonvisualized lesions 6 mm or greater. Of 11 patients reported to have 12 masses (≥20 mm), at subsequent colonoscopy, one patient had no mass. Eighteen patients had 23 large (10–19-mm) polyps that they were suspected of having, and 47 patients had 53 medium (6–9-mm) polyps that they were suspected of having. At a median follow-up of 31 months (range, 6–42 months), 45 (63%) of 72 patients underwent follow-up colonoscopy because of their CT colonographic findings. Rates of repeat colonoscopy for masses, large polyps, and medium polyps were 100%, 94%, and 45%, respectively. Per-patient and per-lesion PPVs of CT colonography for masses, large polyps, and medium polyps were 90.9% and 91.7%, 64.7% and 70%, and 33.3% and 30.4%, respectively.

Conclusion: CT colonography has the potential to become an accepted technique for evaluation of the nonvisualized part of the colon after incomplete colonoscopy, and it can increase the diagnostic yield of masses and clinically important polyps in this part of the colon.

© RSNA, 2007

References

  • 1 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1977–1981.
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med 1993;328:1365–1371.
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Bond JH, et al. Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380. N Engl J Med 2000;343:162–168.
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Anderson ML, Heigh RI, McCoy GA, et al. Accuracy of assessment of the extent of examination by experienced colonoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 1992;38:560–563.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Marshall JB, Barthel JS. The frequency of total colonoscopy and terminal ileal intubation in the 1990s. Gastrointest Endosc 1993;39:518–520.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Dafnis G, Blomqvist P, Pahlman L, et al. The introduction and development of colonoscopy within a defined population in Sweden. Scand J Gastroenterol 2000;35:765–771.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L, et al. Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology 1997;112:594–642.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chong A, Shah JN, Levine MS, et al. Diagnostic yield of barium enema examination after incomplete colonoscopy. Radiology 2002;223:620–624.
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Lappas JC, Maglinte DD, Chernish SM, et al. Discomfort during double contrast barium enema examination: a placebo controlled double-blind evaluation of the effect of glucagon and diazepam. Radiology 1995;197:95–99.
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Eckardt VF, Kanzier G, Willems D, et al. Colonoscopy without premedication versus barium enema: a comparison of patient discomfort. Gastrointest Endosc 1996;44:177–180.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Bova JG, Jurdi RA, Bennett WF. Antispasmodic drugs to reduce discomfort and colonic spasm during barium enemas: comparison of oral hyoscyamine, i.v. glucagon and no drug. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993;161:965–968.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Winawer SJ, Stewart ET, Zauber AG, et al. A comparison of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium enema for surveillance after polypectomy. National Polyp Study Work Group. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1766–1772.
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Rockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwiecki D, et al. Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet 2005;365:305–311.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ, et al. Comparison of the relative sensitivity of CT colonography and double-contrast barium enema for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004;2:314–321.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, et al. Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology 2001;219:685–692.
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy PC 3rd, et al. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1496–1503.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Macari M, Bini EJ, Xue X, et al. Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thin-section low-dose multi-detector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection. Radiology 2002;224:383–392.
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Sosna J, Morrin MM, Kruskal JB, et al. CT colonography of colorectal polyps: a metaanalysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:1593–1598.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2191–2200.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Rex DK. Is virtual colonoscopy ready for widespread application? Gastroenterology 2003;125:608–610.
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Fenlon HM, McAneny DB, Nunes DP, et al. Occlusive colon carcinoma: virtual colonoscopy in the preoperative evaluation of the proximal colon. Radiology 1999;210:423–428.
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Morrin MM, Kruskal JB, Farrell RJ, et al. Endoluminal CT colonography after an incomplete endoscopic colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;172:913–918.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Neri E, Giusti P, Battolla L, et al. Colorectal cancer: role of CT colonography in preoperative evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy. Radiology 2002;223:615–619.
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Macari M, Berman P, Dicker M, et al. Usefulness of CT colonography in patients with incomplete colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;173:561–564.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Britton I, Dover S, Vallance R. Immediate CT pneumocolon for failed colonoscopy: comparison with routine pneumocolon. Clin Radiol 2001;56:89–93.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Shumaker DA, Zaman A, Katon RM. Use of a variable-stiffness colonoscope allows completion of colonoscopy after failure with the standard adult colonoscope. Endoscopy 2002;34:711–714.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Muto T, Bussey HJ, Morson BC. The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum. Cancer 1975;36:2251–2270.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Hofstad B, Vatn MH, Andersen SN, et al. Growth of colorectal polyps: redetection and evaluation of unresected polyps for a period of 3 years. Gut 1996;39:449–456.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 29 O'Brien MJ, Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, et al. The National Polyp Study. Patient and polyp characteristics associated with high-grade dysplasia in colorectal adenomas. Gastroenterology 1990;98:371–379.
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Johnson GL, et al. Building a CT colonography program: necessary ingredients for reimbursement and clinical success. Radiology 2005;235:17–20.
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, et al. CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal. Radiology 2005;236:3–9.
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT, et al. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997;112:24–28.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Sosna J, Morrin MM, Kruskal JB, et al. Colorectal neoplasms: role of intravenous contrast-enhanced CT colonography. Radiology 2003;228:152–156.
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Neri E, Vagli P, Picchietti S, et al. CT colonography: contrast enhancement of benign and malignant colorectal lesions versus fecal residuals. Abdom Imaging 2005;30:694–697.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar

Article History

Published in print: 2007