C. Daniel Johnson

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.

In the United States, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer diagnosed among men and women and the second leading cause of death from cancer. CRC largely can be prevented by the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps, and survival is significantly better when CRC is diagnosed while still localized. In 2006 to 2007, the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology came together to develop consensus guidelines for the detection of adenomatous polyps and CRC in asymptomatic average-risk adults. In this update of each organizations guidelines, screening tests are grouped into those that primarily detect cancer early and those that can detect cancer early and also can detect adenomatous polyps, thus providing a greater potential for prevention through polypectomy. When possible, clinicians should make patients aware of the full range of screening options, but at a minimum they should be prepared to offer patients a choice between a screening test that primarily is effective at early cancer detection and a screening test that is effective at both early cancer detection and cancer prevention through the detection and removal of polyps. It is the strong opinion of these 3 organizations that colon cancer prevention should be the primary goal of screening.

Prospective blinded evaluation of computed tomographic colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps.

BACKGROUND & AIMS This study used a low lesion prevalence population reflective of the screening setting to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of computerized tomographic (CT) colonography for detection of colorectal polyps. METHODS This prospective, blinded study comprised 703 asymptomatic persons at higher-than-average risk for colorectal cancer who underwent CT colonography followed by same-day colonoscopy. Two of 3 experienced readers interpreted each CT colonography examination. RESULTS Overall lesion prevalence for adenomas >/=1 cm in diameter was 5%. Seventy percent of all lesions were proximal to the descending colon. With colonoscopy serving as the gold standard, CT colonography detected 34%, 32%, 73%, and 63% of the 59 polyps >/=1 cm for readers 1, 2, 3, and double-reading, respectively; and 35%, 29%, 57%, and 54% of the 94 polyps 5-9 mm for readers 1, 2, 3, and double-reading, respectively. Specificity for CT colonography ranged from 95% to 98% and 86% to 95% for >1 cm and 5-9-mm polyps, respectively. Interobserver variability was high for CT colonography with kappa statistic values ranging from -0.67 to 0.89. CONCLUSIONS In a low prevalence setting, polyp detection rates at CT colonography are well below those at colonoscopy. These rates are less than previous reports based largely on high lesion prevalence cohorts. High interobserver variability warrants further investigation but may be due to the low prevalence of polyps in this cohort and the high impact on total sensitivity of each missed polyp. Specificity, based on large numbers, is high and exhibits excellent agreement among observers.

Prospective Comparison of State-of-the-Art MR Enterography and CT Enterography in Small-Bowel Crohn's Disease

OBJECTIVE The objective of our study was to prospectively obtain pilot data on the accuracy of MR enterography for detecting small-bowel Crohns disease compared with CT enterography and with a clinical reference standard based on imaging, clinical information, and ileocolonoscopy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS The study group for this blinded prospective study was composed of 33 patients with suspected active Crohns ileal inflammation who were scheduled for clinical CT enterography and ileocolonoscopy and had consented to also undergo MR enterography. The MR enterography and CT enterography examinations were each interpreted by two radiologists with disagreements resolved by consensus. The reports from ileocolonoscopy with or without mucosal biopsy were interpreted by a gastroenterologist. The reference standard for the presence of small-bowel Crohns disease was based on the final clinical diagnosis by the referring gastroenterologist after reviewing all of the available information. RESULTS All 33 patients underwent CT enterography and ileocolonoscopy, 30 of whom also underwent MR enterography. The sensitivities of MR enterography and CT enterography for detecting active small-bowel Crohns disease were similar (90.5% vs 95.2%, respectively; p = 0.32). The image quality scores for MR enterography examinations were significantly lower than those for CT enterography (p = 0.005). MR enterography and CT enterography identified eight cases (24%) with a final diagnosis of active small-bowel inflammation in which the ileal mucosa appeared normal at ileocolonoscopy. Furthermore, enterography provided the only available imaging in three additional patients who did not have ileal intubation. CONCLUSION MR enterography and CT enterography have similar sensitivities for detecting active small-bowel inflammation, but image quality across the study cohort was better with CT. Cross-sectional enterography provides complementary information to ileocolonoscopy.

Small-bowel imaging in Crohn's disease: a prospective, blinded, 4-way comparison trial

BACKGROUND With the introduction of new techniques to image the small bowel, there remains uncertainty about their role for diagnosing Crohns disease. OBJECTIVE To assess the sensitivity and specificity of capsule endoscopy (CE), CT enterography (CTE), ileocolonoscopy, and small-bowel follow-through (SBFT) in the diagnosis of small bowel Crohns disease. METHODS Prospective, blinded trial. SETTING Inflammatory bowel disease clinic at an academic medical center. PATIENTS Known or suspected Crohns disease. Exclusion criteria included known abdominal abscess and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use. Partial small-bowel obstruction (PSBO) at CTE excluded patients from subsequent CE. INTERVENTIONS Patients underwent all 4 tests over a 4-day period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of each test to detect active small-bowel Crohns disease. The criterion standard was a consensus diagnosis based upon clinical presentation and all 4 studies. RESULTS Forty-one CTE examinations were performed. Seven patients (17%) had an asymptomatic PSBO. Forty patients underwent colonoscopy, 38 had SBFT studies, and 28 had CE examinations. Small-bowel Crohns disease was active in 51%, absent in 42%, inactive in 5%, and suspicious in 2% of patients. The sensitivity of CE for detecting active small-bowel Crohns disease was 83%, not significantly higher than CTE (83%), ileocolonoscopy (74%), or SBFT (65%). However, the specificity of CE (53%) was significantly lower than the other tests (P < .05). One patient developed a transient PSBO due to CE, but no patients had retained capsules. LIMITATION Use of a consensus clinical diagnosis as the criterion standard-but this is how Crohns disease is diagnosed in practice. CONCLUSIONS The sensitivity of CE for active small-bowel Crohns disease was not significantly different from CTE, ileocolonoscopy, or SBFT. However, lower specificity and the need for preceding small-bowel radiography (due to the high frequency of asymptomatic PSBO) may limit the utility of CE as a first-line test for Crohns disease.

Reducing the Radiation Dose for CT Colonography Using Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction: A Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE The purpose of our study was to evaluate the feasibility of preserving image quality during CT colonography (CTC) using a reduced radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR). MATERIALS AND METHODS A proven colon phantom was imaged at standard dose settings (50 mAs) and at reduced doses (10-40 mAs) using six different ASIR levels (0-100%). We assessed 2D and 3D image quality and noise to determine the optimal dose and ASIR setting. Eighteen patients were then scanned with a standard CTC dose (50 mAs) in the supine position and at a reduced dose of 25 mAs with 40% ASIR in the prone position. Three radiologists blinded to the scanning techniques assessed 2D and 3D image quality and noise at three different colon locations. A score difference of > or = 1 was considered clinically important. Actual noise measures were compared between the standard-dose and low-dose acquisitions. RESULTS The phantom study showed image noise reduction that correlated with a higher percentage of ASIR. In patients, no significant image quality differences were identified between standard- and low-dose images using 40% ASIR. Overall image quality was reduced for both image sets as body mass index increased. Measured image noise was less with the low-dose technique using ASIR. CONCLUSION The results of this pilot study show that the radiation dose during CTC can be reduced 50% below currently accepted low-dose techniques without significantly affecting image quality when ASIR is used. Further evaluation in a larger patient group is warranted.

Magnetic resonance cholangiography in patients with biliary disease: its role in primary sclerosing cholangitis

BACKGROUND/AIM Magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRC) is a non-invasive diagnostic procedure whose role in the management of patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the usefulness of MRC in the evaluation of the biliary tree in patients with suspected biliary disease, and in particular, PSC. METHODS MRC and invasive cholangiography (ERCP or PTC) were both performed in 73 patients, (33 male, 40 female, mean age 56 years) with clinical and/or biochemical evidence of cholestasis. Images were interpreted by two radiologists unaware of the results of other studies. RESULTS Forty-two patients (58%) had benign biliary disease, including 23 patients (32%) with PSC; 9 patients (12%) had malignant biliary disease; and 22 patients (30%) had a normal biliary tree. Diagnostic quality images were obtained in 73/73 (100%) of MRC, and in 70/73 (96%) of invasive cholangiography (68 ERCPs, 2 PTCs) procedures. Using ERCP/PTC findings as the reference standard, MRC had an accuracy greater than 90% in the diagnosis of normal bile ducts, biliary dilatation, biliary obstruction, bile duct stones, and PSC. Using the final diagnosis, MRC had an overall diagnostic accuracy of 90% in the detection of biliary disease compared to 97% for invasive cholangiography. Additional diagnostic/therapeutic interventions were performed during ERCP in 73% of patients with PSC and in 43% of patients without PSC (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS MRC has excellent diagnostic accuracy in the presence of biliary disease. Because of its noninvasive nature, MRC may have advantages over invasive cholangiography when diagnosis is the major goal of the procedure.

Computerized tomographic colonography: Performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting

BACKGROUND & AIMS No multicenter study has been reported evaluating the performance and interobserver variability of computerized tomographic colonography. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of computerized tomographic colonography for detecting clinically important colorectal neoplasia (polyps >or=10 mm in diameter) in a multi-institutional study. METHODS A retrospective study was developed from 341 patients who had computerized tomographic colonography and colonoscopy among 8 medical centers. Colonoscopy and pathology reports provided the standard. A random sample of 117 patients, stratified by criterion standard, was requested. Ninety-three patients were included (47% with polyps >or=10 mm; mean age, 62 years; 56% men; 84% white; 40% reported colorectal symptoms; 74% at increased risk for colorectal cancer). Eighteen radiologists blinded to the criterion standard interpreted computerized tomography colonography examinations, each using 2 of 3 different software display platforms. RESULTS The average area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for identifying patients with at least 1 lesion >or=10 mm was 0.80 (95% lower confidence bound, 0.74). The average sensitivity and specificity were 75% (95% lower confidence bound, 68%) and 73% (95% lower confidence bound, 66%), respectively. Per-polyp sensitivity was 75%. A trend was observed for better performance with more observer experience. There was no difference in performance across software display platforms. CONCLUSIONS Computerized tomographic colonography performance compared favorably with reported performance of fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and barium enema. A prospective study evaluating the performance of computerized tomography colonography in a screening population is indicated.

ACR Colon Cancer Committee White Paper: Status of CT Colonography 2009

PURPOSE To review the current status and rationale of the updated ACR practice guidelines for CT colonography (CTC). METHODS Clinical validation trials in both the United States and Europe are reviewed. Key technical aspects of the CTC examination are emphasized, including low-dose protocols, proper insufflation, and bowel preparation. Important issues of implementation are discussed, including training and certification, definition of the target lesion, reporting of colonic and extracolonic findings, quality metrics, reimbursement, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS Successful validation trials in screening cohorts both in the United States with ACRIN and in Germany demonstrated sensitivity > or = 90% for patients with polyps >10 mm. Proper technique is critical, including low-dose techniques in screening cohorts, with an upper limit of the CT dose index by volume of 12.5 mGy per examination. Training new readers includes the requirement of interactive workstation training with 2-D and 3-D image display techniques. The target lesion is defined as a polyp > or = 6 mm, consistent with the American Cancer Society joint guidelines. Five quality metrics have been defined for CTC, with pilot data entered. Although the CMS national noncoverage decision in May 2009 was a disappointment, multiple third-party payers are reimbursing for screening CTC. Cost-effective modeling has shown CTC to be a dominant strategy, including in a Medicare cohort. CONCLUSION Supported by third-party payer reimbursement for screening, CTC will continue to further transition into community practice and can provide an important adjunctive examination for colorectal screening.

Computer‐assisted detection of colonic polyps with CT colonography using neural networks and binary classification trees

Detection of colonic polyps in CT colonography is problematic due to complexities of polyp shape and the surface of the normal colon. Published results indicate the feasibility of computer-aided detection of polyps but better classifiers are needed to improve specificity. In this paper we compare the classification results of two approaches: neural networks and recursive binary trees. As our starting point we collect surface geometry information from three-dimensional reconstruction of the colon, followed by a filter based on selected variables such as region density, Gaussian and average curvature and sphericity. The filter returns sites that are candidate polyps, based on earlier work using detection thresholds, to which the neural nets or the binary trees are applied. A data set of 39 polyps from 3 to 25 mm in size was used in our investigation. For both neural net and binary trees we use tenfold cross-validation to better estimate the true error rates. The backpropagation neural net with one hidden layer trained with Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm achieved the best results: sensitivity 90% and specificity 95% with 16 false positives per study.

Comparison of the relative sensitivity of CT colonography and double-contrast barium enema for screen detection of colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND & AIMS In a population reflective of a screening setting, our aim was to compare the relative sensitivity and specificity of computed tomography (CT) colonography with double-contrast barium enema (DCBE) for detection of colorectal polyps and to assess the added value of double reading at CT colonography, using endoscopy as the arbiter. METHODS This prospective, blinded study comprised 837 asymptomatic persons at higher than average risk for colorectal cancer who underwent CT colonography followed by same-day DCBE. Examinations with polyps > or =5 mm in diameter were referred to colonoscopy. RESULTS CT colonography readers detected 56%-79% of polyps > or =10 mm in diameter. In comparison, the sensitivity at DCBE varied between 39% and 56% for the 31 polyps > or =1 cm. All of the readers detected more polyps at CT colonography than DCBE, but the difference was statistically significant for only a single reader (P = 0.02). Relative specificity for polyps > or =10 mm on a per-patient basis ranged from 96% to 99% at CT colonography, and 99%-100% at DCBE. Doubly read CT colonography detected significantly more polyps than DCBE (81% vs. 45% for polyps > or =1 cm [P = <0.01], and 72% vs. 44% for polyps 5-9 mm [P < or = 0.01]). CONCLUSIONS Double-read CT colonography is significantly more sensitive in detecting polyps than single-read double contrast barium enema. DCBE was significantly more specific than CT colonography.