Location of adenomas missed by optical colonoscopy

被引:350
作者
Pickhardt, PJ
Nugent, PA
Mysliwiec, PA
Choi, JR
Schindler, WR
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Sch Med, Dept Radiol, Clin Sci Ctr E3311, Madison, WI 53792 USA
[2] Uniformed Serv Univ Hlth Sci, Natl Naval Med Ctr, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA
[3] NCI, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[4] Walter Reed Army Med Ctr, Washington, DC 20307 USA
[5] Naval Med Ctr San Diego, San Diego, CA USA
关键词
D O I
10.7326/0003-4819-141-5-200409070-00009
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Previous estimates of the adenoma miss rate with optical colonoscopy (OC) are hindered by the use of OC as its own reference standard. Objective: To evaluate the frequency and characteristics of colorectal neoplasms that are missed prospectively on OC by using virtual colonoscopy (VC) as a separate reference standard. Design: Prospective, multicenter screening trial. Setting: 3 medical centers. Participants: 1233 asymptomatic adults who underwent same-day VC and OC. Measurements: Colorectal neoplasms (adenomatous polyps) missed at OC before VC results were unblinded. Results: Fourteen (93.3%) of 15 nonrectal neoplasms were located on a fold; 10 (71.4%) of these were located on the backside of a fold. Five (83.3%) of 6 rectal lesions were located within 10 cm of the anal verge. Limitations: Estimation of the OC miss rate depended on polyp detection on both VC and second-look OC and therefore underestimates the true OC miss rate, particularly for smaller polyps. Conclusions: Most clinically significant adenomas missed prospectively on OC are located behind a fold or near the anal verge. The 12% OC miss rate for large adenomas (greater than or equal to10 mm) when state-of-the-art 3-dimensional VC is used as a separate reference standard is increased from the previous 0% to 6% estimates derived by using OC as its own reference standard.
引用
收藏
页码:352 / 359
页数:8
相关论文
共 19 条
  • [1] Colon polyps and cancer
    Bond, JH
    [J]. ENDOSCOPY, 2003, 35 (01) : 27 - 35
  • [2] Clinical relevance of the small colorectal polyp
    Bond, JH
    [J]. ENDOSCOPY, 2001, 33 (05) : 454 - 457
  • [3] Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy) - A multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia
    Cotton, PB
    Durkalski, VL
    Benoit, PC
    Palesch, YY
    Mauldin, PD
    Hoffman, B
    Vining, DJ
    Small, WC
    Affronti, J
    Rex, D
    Kopecky, KK
    Ackerman, S
    Burdick, JS
    Brewington, C
    Turner, MA
    Zfass, A
    Wright, AR
    Iyer, RB
    Lynch, P
    Sivak, MV
    Butler, H
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2004, 291 (14): : 1713 - 1719
  • [4] Is in vivo measurement of size of polyps during colonoscopy accurate?
    Gopalswamy, N
    Shenoy, VN
    Choudhry, U
    Markert, RJ
    Peace, N
    Bhutani, MS
    Barde, CJ
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1997, 46 (06) : 497 - 502
  • [5] GROBO JL, 1982, AM J JASTROENTEROL, V77, P865
  • [6] PROSPECTIVE BLINDED TRIAL OF THE COLONOSCOPIC MISS-RATE OF LARGE COLORECTAL POLYPS
    HIXSON, LJ
    FENNERTY, MB
    SAMPLINER, RE
    GAREWAL, HS
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1991, 37 (02) : 125 - 127
  • [7] THE CLEAN COLON - A PROSPECTIVE, PARTLY RANDOMIZED STUDY OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF REPEATED EXAMINATIONS OF THE COLON AFTER POLYPECTOMY AND RADICAL SURGERY FOR CANCER
    KRONBORG, O
    HAGE, E
    DEICHGRAEBER, E
    [J]. SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 1981, 16 (07) : 879 - 884
  • [8] INCIDENCE AND RECURRENCE RATES OF COLORECTAL ADENOMAS - A PROSPECTIVE-STUDY
    NEUGUT, AI
    JACOBSON, JS
    AHSAN, H
    SANTOS, J
    GARBOWSKI, GC
    FORDE, KA
    TREAT, MR
    WAYE, J
    [J]. GASTROENTEROLOGY, 1995, 108 (02) : 402 - 408
  • [9] Pickhardt PJ, 2004, NEW ENGL J MED, V350, P1149
  • [10] Electronic cleansing and stool tagging in CT colonography: Advantages and pitfalls with primary three-dimensional evaluation
    Pickhardt, PJ
    Choi, JHR
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2003, 181 (03) : 799 - 805