Judy Yee

Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison.

BACKGROUND The usefulness of currently available colon imaging tests, including air contrast barium enema (ACBE), computed tomographic colonography (CTC), and colonoscopy, to detect colon polyps and cancers is uncertain. We aimed to assess the sensitivity of these three imaging tests. METHODS Patients with faecal occult blood, haematochezia, iron-deficiency anaemia, or a family history of colon cancer underwent three separate colon-imaging studies--ACBE, followed 7-14 days later by CTC and colonoscopy on the same day. The primary outcome was detection of colonic polyps and cancers. Outcomes were assessed by building an aggregate view of the colon, taking into account results of all three tests. FINDINGS 614 patients completed all three imaging tests. When analysed on a per-patient basis, for lesions 10 mm or larger in size (n=63), the sensitivity of ACBE was 48% (95% CI 35-61), CTC 59% (46-71, p=0.1083 for CTC vs ACBE), and colonoscopy 98% (91-100, p<0.0001 for colonoscopy vs CTC). For lesions 6-9 mm in size (n=116), sensitivity was 35% for ACBE (27-45), 51% for CTC (41-60, p=0.0080 for CTC vs ACBE), and 99% for colonoscopy (95-100, p<0.0001 for colonoscopy vs CTC). For lesions of 10 mm or larger in size, the specificity was greater for colonoscopy (0.996) than for either ACBE (0.90) or CTC (0.96) and declined for ACBE and CTC when smaller lesions were considered. INTERPRETATION Colonoscopy was more sensitive than other tests, as currently undertaken, for detection of colonic polyps and cancers. These data have important implications for diagnostic use of colon imaging tests.

Surface normal overlap: a computer-aided detection algorithm with application to colonic polyps and lung nodules in helical CT

We developed a novel computer-aided detection (CAD) algorithm called the surface normal overlap method that we applied to colonic polyp detection and lung nodule detection in helical computed tomography (CT) images. We demonstrate some of the theoretical aspects of this algorithm using a statistical shape model. The algorithm was then optimized on simulated CT data and evaluated using a per-lesion cross-validation on 8 CT colonography datasets and on 8 chest CT datasets. It is able to achieve 100% sensitivity for colonic polyps 10 mm and larger at 7.0 false positives (FPs)/dataset and 90% sensitivity for solid lung nodules 6 mm and larger at 5.6 FP/dataset.

A statistical 3-D pattern processing method for computer-aided detection of polyps in CT colonography

Adenomatous polyps in the colon are believed to be the precursor to colorectal carcinoma, the second leading cause of cancer deaths in United States. In this paper, we propose a new method for computer-aided detection of polyps in computed tomography (CT) colonography (virtual colonoscopy), a technique in which polyps are imaged along the wall of the air-inflated, cleansed colon with X-ray CT. Initial work with computer aided detection has shown high sensitivity, but at a cost of too many false positives. We present a statistical approach that uses support vector machines to distinguish the differentiating characteristics of polyps and healthy tissue, and uses this information for the classification of the new cases. One of the main contributions of the paper is the new three-dimensional pattern processing approach, called random orthogonal shape sections method, which combines the information from many random images to generate reliable signatures of shape. The input to the proposed system is a collection of volume data from candidate polyps obtained by a high-sensitivity, low-specificity system that we developed previously. The results of our tenfold cross-validation experiments show that, on the average, the system increases the specificity from 0.19 (0.35) to 0.69 (0.74) at a sensitivity level of 1.0 (0.95).

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.

Diagnostic accuracy of laxative-free computed tomographic colonography for detection of adenomatous polyps in asymptomatic adults, A prospective evaluation

BACKGROUND Colon screening by optical colonoscopy (OC) or computed tomographic colonography (CTC) requires a laxative bowel preparation, which inhibits screening participation. OBJECTIVE To assess the performance of detecting adenomas 6 mm or larger and patient experience of laxative-free, computer-aided CTC. DESIGN Prospective test comparison of laxative-free CTC and OC. The CTC included electronic cleansing and computer-aided detection. Optical colonoscopy examinations were initially blinded to CTC results, which were subsequently revealed during colonoscope withdrawal; this method permitted reexamination to resolve discrepant findings. Unblinded OC served as a reference standard. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT01200303) SETTING Multicenter ambulatory imaging and endoscopy centers. PARTICIPANTS 605 adults aged 50 to 85 years at average to moderate risk for colon cancer. MEASUREMENTS Per-patient sensitivity and specificity of CTC and first-pass OC for detecting adenomas at thresholds of 10 mm or greater, 8 mm or greater, and 6 mm or greater; per-lesion sensitivity and survey data describing patient experience with preparations and examinations. RESULTS For adenomas 10 mm or larger, per-patient sensitivity of CTC was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.99) and specificity was 0.85 (CI, 0.82 to 0.88); sensitivity of OC was 0.95 (CI, 0.77 to 1.00) and specificity was 0.89 (CI, 0.86 to 0.91). Sensitivity of CTC was 0.70 (CI, 0.53 to 0.83) for adenomas 8 mm or larger and 0.59 (CI, 0.47 to 0.70) for those 6 mm or larger; sensitivity of OC for adenomas 8 mm or larger was 0.88 (CI, 0.73 to 0.96) and 0.76 (CI, 0.64 to 0.85) for those 6 mm or larger. The specificity of OC at the threshold of 8 mm or larger was 0.91 and at 6 mm or larger was 0.94. Specificity for OC was greater than that for CTC, which was 0.86 at the threshold of 8 mm or larger and 0.88 at 6 mm or larger (P= 0.02). Reported participant experience for comfort and difficulty of examination preparation was better with CTC than OC. LIMITATIONS There were 3 CTC readers. The survey instrument was not independently validated. CONCLUSION Computed tomographic colonography was accurate in detecting adenomas 10 mm or larger but less so for smaller lesions. Patient experience was better with laxative-free CTC. These results suggest a possible role for laxative-free CTC as an alternate screening method.

Radiation-Related Cancer Risks From CT Colonography Screening: A Risk-Benefit Analysis

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to estimate the ratio of cancers prevented to induced (benefit-risk ratio) for CT colonography (CTC) screening every 5 years from the age of 50 to 80 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS Radiation-related cancer risk was estimated using risk projection models based on the National Research Councils Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII Committees report and screening protocols from the American College of Radiology Imaging Networks National CT Colonography Trial. Uncertainty intervals were estimated using Monte Carlo simulation methods. Comparative modeling with three colorectal cancer microsimulation models was used to estimate the potential reduction in colorectal cancer cases and deaths. RESULTS The estimated mean effective dose per CTC screening study was 8 mSv for women and 7 mSv for men. The estimated number of radiation-related cancers resulting from CTC screening every 5 years from the age of 50 to 80 years was 150 cases/100,000 individuals screened (95% uncertainty interval, 80-280) for men and women. The estimated number of colorectal cancers prevented by CTC every 5 years from age 50 to 80 ranged across the three microsimulation models from 3580 to 5190 cases/100,000 individuals screened, yielding a benefit-risk ratio that varied from 24:1 (95% uncertainty interval, 13:1-45:1) to 35:1 (19:1-65:1). The benefit-risk ratio for cancer deaths was even higher than the ratio for cancer cases. Inclusion of radiation-related cancer risks from CT examinations performed to follow up extracolonic findings did not materially alter the results. CONCLUSION Concerns have been raised about recommending CTC as a routine screening tool because of potential harms including the radiation risks. Based on these models, the benefits from CTC screening every 5 years from the age of 50 to 80 years clearly outweigh the radiation risks.

Edge displacement field-based classification for improved detection of polyps in CT colonography

Colorectal cancer can easily be prevented provided that the precursors to tumors, small colonic polyps, are detected and removed. Currently, the only definitive examination of the colon is fiber-optic colonoscopy, which is invasive and expensive. Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is potentially a less costly and less invasive alternative to FOC. It would be desirable to have computer-aided detection (CAD) algorithms to examine the large amount of data CTC provides. Most current CAD algorithms have high false positive rates at the required sensitivity levels. We developed and evaluated a postprocessing algorithm to decrease the false positive rate of such a CAD method without sacrificing sensitivity. Our method attempts to model the way a radiologist recognizes a polyp while scrolling a cross-sectional plane through three-dimensional computed tomography data by classification of the changes in the location of the edges in the two-dimensional plane. We performed a tenfold cross-validation study to assess its performance using sensitivity/specificity analysis on data from 48 patients. The mean specificity over all experiments increased from 0.19 (0.35) to 0.47 (0.56) for a sensitivity of 1.00 (0.95).

ACR appropriateness Criteria® right lower quadrant pain - Suspected appendicitis

The most common cause of acute right lower quadrant (RLQ) pain requiring surgery is acute appendicitis (AA). This narratives focus is on imaging procedures in the diagnosis of AA, with consideration of other diseases causing RLQ pain. In general, Computed Tomography (CT) is the most accurate imaging study for evaluating suspected AA and alternative etiologies of RLQ pain. Data favor intravenous contrast use for CT, but the need for enteric contrast when intravenous contrast is used is not strongly favored. Radiation exposure concerns from CT have led to increased investigation in minimizing CT radiation dose while maintaining diagnostic accuracy and in using algorithms with ultrasound as a first imaging examination followed by CT in inconclusive cases. In children, ultrasound is the preferred initial examination, as it is nearly as accurate as CT for the diagnosis of AA in this population and without ionizing radiation exposure. In pregnant women, ultrasound is preferred initially with MRI as a second imaging examination in inconclusive cases, which is the majority.The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every three years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

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.

Computed Tomography Colonography: Feasibility of Computer-Aided Polyp Detection in a "First Reader" Paradigm

Objective: To determine the feasibility of a computer-aided detection (CAD) algorithm as the “first reader” in computed tomography colonography (CTC). Methods: In phase 1 of a 2-part blind trial, we measured the performance of 3 radiologists reading 41 CTC studies without CAD. In phase 2, readers interpreted the same cases using a CAD list of 30 potential polyps. Results: Unassisted readers detected, on average, 63% of polyps ≥10 mm in diameter. Using CAD, the sensitivity was 74% (not statistically different). Per-patient analysis showed a trend toward increased sensitivity for polyps ≥10 mm in diameter, from 73% to 90% with CAD (not significant) without decreasing specificity. Computer-aided detection significantly decreased interobserver variability (P = 0.017). Average time to detection of the first polyp decreased significantly with CAD, whereas total reading case reading time was unchanged. Conclusion: Computer-aided detection as a first reader in CTC was associated with similar per-polyp and per-patient detection sensitivity to unassisted reading. Computer-aided detection decreased interobserver variability and reduced the time required to detect the first polyp.