Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 12949715

Computerized tomographic colonography: performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting.

C Daniel Johnson·Alicia Y Toledano·Benjamin A Herman·Abraham H Dachman·Elizabeth G McFarland·Matthew A Barish·James A Brink·Randy D Ernst·Joel G Fletcher·Robert A Halvorsen·Amy K Hara·Kenneth D Hopper·Robert E Koehler·David S k Lu·Michael Macari·Robert L Maccarty·Frank H Miller·Martina Morrin·Erik K Paulson·Judy Yee·Michael Zalis·American College of Radiology Imaging Network A6656
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

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.

Explore related subjects

Colonic NeoplasmsColonic PolypsColonography, Computed TomographicFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityJournal ArticleMulticenter StudyResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C Daniel Johnson, Alicia Y Toledano, Benjamin A Herman, Abraham H Dachman, Elizabeth G McFarland, Matthew A Barish, James A Brink, Randy D Ernst, Joel G Fletcher, Robert A Halvorsen, Amy K Hara, Kenneth D Hopper, Robert E Koehler, David S k Lu, Michael Macari, Robert L Maccarty, Frank H Miller, Martina Morrin, Erik K Paulson, Judy Yee, Michael Zalis, American College of Radiology Imaging Network A6656. 2003. Computerized tomographic colonography: performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0016-5085(03)01058-8

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Racial disparities in colon cancer. Primary care endoscopy as a tool to increase screening rates among minority patients.

Colon cancer is a condition whose far-reaching effects have been well documented nationally and within the state of South Carolina. Fortunately, the disease is amenable to both primary and secondary prevention through screening colonoscopy. Despite the conceptual simplicity of recommending colonoscopy, barriers exist to universal (or even widespread) screening. Currently the infrastructure necessary to achieve screening goals set by the American Cancer Society (ACS), the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) has not been established. At current rates of training gastroenterologists, the medical community will not be able to come close to achieving widespread screening. Given the discrepancy between the public health benefit of achieving the goals and the deaths that have occurred because of the resource shortfall, we propose alternative measures to screen the at-risk population for consideration. This need is most acute in the black community, in which where screening rates tend to be lower and polyps have been found to progress more quickly than among white populations. In South Carolina, one model has used primary care physicians as the labor force to provide routine screening colonoscopy for their own patients. This model makes screening much more accessible to minority patients, as the wait is shorter and the cost typically lower. In combination with a faith-based partnership with minority religious organizations, this model has begun to make needed inroads toward addressing the disparities associated with colon cancer. Cancer 2007. (c) 2006 American Cancer Society.

Colonic Neoplasms↗
PubMed2007

Influence of caseload and surgical speciality on outcome following surgery for colorectal cancer: a review of evidence. Part 2: long-term outcome.

OBJECTIVE: We reviewed recent literature to assess the impact of hospital caseload, surgeon's caseload and education on long-term outcome following colorectal cancer surgery. METHOD: We searched the MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases for relevant literature starting from 1992. We selected hospital caseload, surgeon's caseload and surgeon's education, type of hospital, and surgeon's experience as variables of interest. Measures of outcome were recurrence-free survival and overall survival, and for rectal cancer frequency of permanent stoma. We reviewed the 34 studies according to tumour location: colonic cancer, rectal cancer, or colorectal cancer. We described the studies individually and performed a meta-analysis whenever it was considered appropriate. RESULTS: For colonic cancer, overall survival improved with increasing hospital caseload, odds ratio (OR) 1.22 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-1.28], and surgeon's education. For rectal cancer, overall survival improved with increasing hospital caseload, OR 1.38 (95% CI 1.19-1.60), and, possibly by surgeon' education and experience. Cancer-free survival was strongly influenced by surgeon's education. The colostomy rate was less in high caseload hospitals, OR 0.76 (95% CI 0.68-0.85). For colorectal cancer, overall survival improved with surgeon's education. CONCLUSION: The data have provided evidence that long-term survival following colorectal cancer surgery in general improved significantly with increasing hospital caseload and surgeon's education.

Colonic Neoplasms↗
PubMed2007

Management of duodenal involvement in locally advanced colonic carcinoma.

Removal of locally advanced right-sided colonic carcinoma involving the duodenum can be challenging. There are few data on the optimal surgical approach. Adjacent organ involvement is associated with a poor prognosis and may be classified as inoperable with patients having palliative bypass procedures rather than primary resection. Survival is however improved after en bloc resection of adjoining viscera compared with intestinal bypass. We present a variety of surgical options depending on the extent of local invasion and the debility of the patient.

Colonic Neoplasms↗