Comparison of the Relative Sensitivity of CT Colonography and Double-Contrast Barium Enema for Screen Detection of Colorectal Polyps

被引:63
作者
Johnson, C. Daniel [1 ]
MacCarty, Robert L. [1 ]
Welch, Timothy J. [1 ]
Wilson, Lynn A. [1 ]
Harmsen, William S. [2 ]
Ilstrup, Duane M. [2 ]
Ahlquist, David A. [3 ]
机构
[1] Mayo Clin Rochester, Dept Radiol, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[2] Mayo Clin Rochester, Dept Hlth Sci Res, Biostat Sect, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[3] Mayo Clin Rochester, Dept Internal Med, Div Gastroenterol & Hepatol, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S1542-3565(04)00061-8
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
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 >= 5 mm in diameter were referred to colonoscopy. Results: CT colonography readers detected 56%-79% of polyps >= 10 mm in diameter. In comparison, the sensitivity at DCBE varied between 39% and 56% for the 31 polyps >= 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 >= 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 >= 1 cm [P = <0.01], and 72% vs. 44% for polyps 5-9 mm [P <= 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.
引用
收藏
页码:314 / 321
页数:8
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]  
American Cancer Society, 2002, CANC FACTS FIG 2002
[2]  
American College of Radiology, 2002, ACR STAND 2000 2001, P163
[3]   BIASES IN THE ASSESSMENT OF DIAGNOSTIC-TESTS [J].
BEGG, CB .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 1987, 6 (04) :411-423
[4]   COLORECTAL-CANCER OVERLOOKED AT BARIUM ENEMA EXAMINATION AND COLONOSCOPY - A CONTINUING PERCEPTUAL PROBLEM [J].
BRADY, AP ;
STEVENSON, GW ;
STEVENSON, I .
RADIOLOGY, 1994, 192 (02) :373-378
[5]   CT colonography: Value of scanning in both the supine and prone positions [J].
Chen, SC ;
Lu, DSK ;
Hecht, JR ;
Kadell, BM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1999, 172 (03) :595-599
[6]   CT colonography with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps [J].
Dachman, AH ;
Kuniyoshi, JK ;
Boyle, CM ;
Samara, Y ;
Hoffmann, KR ;
Rubin, DT ;
Hanan, I .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1998, 171 (04) :989-995
[7]   SCREENING FOR COLORECTAL-CANCER [J].
EDDY, DM .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1990, 113 (05) :373-384
[8]   SCREENING FOR COLORECTAL-CANCER IN A HIGH-RISK POPULATION - RESULTS OF A MATHEMATICAL-MODEL [J].
EDDY, DM ;
NUGENT, FW ;
EDDY, JF ;
COLLER, J ;
GILBERTSEN, V ;
GOTTLIEB, LS ;
RICE, R ;
SHERLOCK, P ;
WINAWER, S .
GASTROENTEROLOGY, 1987, 92 (03) :682-692
[9]   Virtual colonoscopy: Imaging features with colonoscopic correlation [J].
Fenlon, HM ;
Clarke, PD ;
Ferrucci, JT .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1998, 170 (05) :1303-1309
[10]   Occlusive colon carcinoma: Virtual colonoscopy in the preoperative evaluation of the proximal colon [J].
Fenlon, HM ;
McAneny, DB ;
Nunes, DP ;
Clarke, PD ;
Ferrucci, JT .
RADIOLOGY, 1999, 210 (02) :423-428