Journals / Tanısal ve Girişimsel Radyoloji (Yeni Adı: Dİagnostic & Intervent. Radiol) / 2004 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3

Diagnostic efficiency of multislice computed tomography colonography in the detection of colorectal tumors: Comparison with conventional colonography

Kolorektal tümörlerin tanısında çok-kesitli BT kolonografinin konvansiyonel kolonoskopi ile karşılaştırılması

Pages
218–229
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

CONCLUSION: Multislice CT colonography is a good alternative to other colorectal screening tests because it has high sensitivity for polyps 10 mm or larger in diameter, is relatively safe and minimally invasive.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of multislice CT colonography in the detection of colorectal tumors by comparing it with conventional colonography in patients with high risk of colorectal cancer MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients who had undergone conventional colonoscopy because of a suspicion of colorectal cancer were scanned with a fourdetector multislice CT scanner with 4x1 mm detector collimation, 120 kV, 0.5 sec gantry rotation and 120 mAs scan parameters.
📊
Key Findings & Data:With conventional colonoscopy taken as the reference standard, the results were calculated with 95% confidence interval technique.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONCLUSION: Multislice CT colonography is a good alternative to other colorectal screening tests because it has high sensitivity for polyps 10 mm or larger in diameter, is relatively safe and minimally invasive.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kolonoskopi · Kolorektal neoplazmlar · Tomografi

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of multislice CT colonography in the detection of colorectal tumors by comparing it with conventional colonography in patients with high risk of colorectal cancer MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients who had undergone conventional colonoscopy because of a suspicion of colorectal cancer were scanned with a fourdetector multislice CT scanner with 4x1 mm detector collimation, 120 kV, 0.5 sec gantry rotation and 120 mAs scan parameters. Multiplanar reformatted images, virtual colonography and virtual colonoscopy images were compared with conventional colonoscopy. With conventional colonoscopy taken as the reference standard, the results were calculated with 95% confidence interval technique. RESULTS: Seventeen of the 23 polyps detected in conventional colonoscopy were identified correctly with multislice CT. Nine of 11 lesions with a diameter of 10 mm or greater (81%), three of four lesions with a diameter of 6-9 mm (75%), and five of eight lesions with a diameter of 1-5 mm (62%) were correctly identified with multislice CT. CONCLUSION: Multislice CT colonography is a good alternative to other colorectal screening tests because it has high sensitivity for polyps 10 mm or larger in diameter, is relatively safe and minimally invasive.

Özet

AMAÇ Konvansiyonel kolonoskopi yapılan kolorektal kanser riski yüksek hastalarda, çok kesitli BT kolonografi tetkikinin kolorektal patolojilerin saptanmasındaki tanısal etkinliğini konvansiyonel kolonoskopi ile karşılaştırarak değerlendirmek. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM Kolon kanseri şüphesiyle konvansiyonel kolonoskopi yapılan 37 hastaya 4 dedektörlü bir çok kesitli BT cihazı ile 4x1 mm’lik dedektör kolimasyonu, 120 kV, 0.5 sn’lik gantri rotasyonu ve 120 mAs’lik parametreler ile çekimler gerçekleştirildi. Her hastada yapılan multiplanar reformat imajlar, sanal kolonografi ve sanal kolonoskopi imajları konvansiyonel kolonoskopi ile karşılaştırıldış Sonuçlar %95 güvenilirlik alanı tekniği ile konvansiyonel kolonoskopi bulguları referans standart alınarak hesaplandı. BULGULAR Konvansiyonel kolonoskopide izlenen 23 polipin 17’si çok kesitli BT kolonografide doğru olarak saptandı. 10 mm ve daha büyük boyuttaki 11 lezyondan dokuz tanesi (%81), 6-9 mm boyutları arasındaki dört lezyondan üç tanesi (%75), 1-5 mm boyutları arasındaki sekiz lezyondan beş tanesi (%62)çok kesitli BT kolonografide doğru olarak saptandı. SONUÇ Sonuçlar çok kesitli BT kolonografi tetkikinin 10 mm’nin üzerindeki poliplerde duyarlılığının yüksek olması, rölatif olarak güvenilir ve minimal invazif olması nedeni ile varolan diğer kolorektal kanser tarama testlerine iyi bir alternatif olabileceğini göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAKIR, B., YEKELER, E., TUNACI, M., TUNACI, A., ACUNAŞ, B., ACUNAŞ, G. (2004). Diagnostic efficiency of multislice computed tomography colonography in the detection of colorectal tumors: Comparison with conventional colonography. Tanısal ve Girişimsel Radyoloji (Yeni Adı: Dİagnostic & Intervent. Radiol), Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3, 218–229. https://ajindex.com/articles/363194

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Judy Y, Geetanjali AA, Raymond K, et al. Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology 2001; 219:685- 692
  2. Ferrucci JT. Colon cancer screening with virtual colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 177:975-988
  3. Mandel JS; Bond JH, Church TR, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. N Engl J Med 1993; 328:1365-1371
  4. Waye JD, Bashkoff E. Total colonoscopy: is it always possible? Gastrointest Endosc 1991; 37:152-154
  5. Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT, et al. Colonoscopy miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997; 112:24-28
  6. Nelson D, McQuaid K, Bond J, et al. Cooperative colonoscopy screening group. Gastrointest Endosc 1999; 49:65-72
  7. Byers T, Levin B, Rothenberger D, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for screening and surveillance for early detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: update 1997. CA Cancer J Clin 1997; 47:154- 60
  8. Oto A, Değer A, Koçer I, et al. Kolorektal poliplerin ve kitlelerin saptanmas›nda spiral BT kolonografinin tan›sal etkinliği Tani Girisim Radiol 2001; 4:541-552
  9. Fenlon HM, Nunes PD, Schrov CP, et al. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med 1999; 341:1496- 1503
  10. Vining DJ, Gelfand DW. Noninvasive colonoscopy using helical CT sacanning. 3D reconstruction and virtual reality. Paper presented at the 1994 Meeting of the Society of Gastrointestinal Radiologist, Maui, Hawaii, USA. 13-18 February 1994
  11. Yee J, Hung RK, Akerkar GA, et al. The usefulness of glucagon hydrochloride for colonic distention. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999; 173:169-172
  12. Fenlon HM. Virtual colonoscopy. Br J Surg 2002; 89:1-3
  13. Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, et al. CT colonography: overcoming the problems of collapse and colonic fluid. Radiology 1998; 200:209-296
  14. Oto A, Gelebek V, Oguz BS, et al. CT attenuation of colorectal polypoid lesions: evaluation of contrast enhancement in CT colonography. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:1657- 1663
  15. Laghi A, Iannaccone R, Carbone I, et al. Computed tomographic colonography (virtual endoscopy): blinded prospective comparison with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasia. Endoscopy 2002; 34:441-446
  16. Hara AK, Johnson JD, Reed JE, at al. Detection of colorectal polyps by computed tomographic colography: feasibility of a novel technique. Gastroente