AJR AJR-based Continuing Ed for Technologists
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gluecker, T. M.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, C. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gluecker, T. M.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, C. D.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
AJR 2004; 182:881-889
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Characterization of Lesions Missed on Interpretation of CT Colonography Using a 2D Search Method

Thomas M. Gluecker1, J. G. Fletcher1, Timothy J. Welch1, Robert L. MacCarty1, William S. Harmsen2, Jeffrey R. Harrington2, Duane Ilstrup2, Lynn A. Wilson1, Kay E. Corcoran1 and C. Daniel Johnson1

1 Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, 200 First St. SW, Rochester, MN 55905.
2 Department of Health Sciences Research, Section of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN 55905.

OBJECTIVE. We examined potential factors that may cause false-negative results on CT colonography examinations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. In this prospective and retrospective study, 500 asymptomatic patients at high risk for colorectal cancer underwent CT colonography and colonoscopy. Each CT data set was interpreted by two independent observers, who were unaware of endoscopic findings, using a method of searching through enlarged axial images to detect intraluminal lesions. Another observer identified and characterized lesions missed at prospective interpretation. Polyps were assessed for size, method of visualization, intrinsic and extrinsic features, and examination quality.

RESULTS. We found 116 polyps at least 5 mm in diameter, 54 (47%) of which were missed by at least one of the prospective observers. Polyps seen in only one position were missed more often than polyps seen in both supine and prone positions (84% vs 50%, p < 0.01). Polyps located in suboptimally prepared colonic segments or along a thickened colonic wall were more frequently missed (p = 0.02 and p = 0.05, respectively). Endoscopic morphology and irregular surface contour were associated with missed lesions of all sizes (p = 0.03 and p = 0.04, respectively). Rounded intraluminal lesions were detected more often than other morphologies on CT (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION. Factors that influence the likelihood that a polyp may be missed at interpretation of CT colonography include being seen only in one position, having flat endoscopic or CT morphology, having surface irregularity, and being located in a poorly prepared segment or along a thickened colonic wall. Understanding these features should lead to improved polyp detection on CT colonography.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JAMAHome page
C. Matuchansky
Computed Tomographic Colonography for Detecting Advanced Neoplasia
JAMA, October 14, 2009; 302(14): 1527 - 1527.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. A. Taylor, C. Robinson, D. Boone, L. Honeyfield, and S. Halligan
Polyp Characteristics Correctly Annotated by Computer-aided Detection Software but Ignored by Reporting Radiologists during CT Colonography
Radiology, September 29, 2009; (2009) radiol.2533090356v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. W. Lee, S. H. Kim, H. S. Park, J.-G. Lee, S. M. Joo, S. An, and B. I. Choi
An Anthropomorphic Phantom Study of Computer-Aided Detection Performance for Polyp Detection on CT Colonography: A Comparison of Commercially and Academically Available Systems
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2009; 193(2): 445 - 454.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. H. Park, S. Y. Kim, S. S. Lee, L. Bogoni, A. Y. Kim, S.-K. Yang, S.-J. Myung, J.-S. Byeon, B. D. Ye, and H. K. Ha
Sensitivity of CT Colonography for Nonpolypoid Colorectal Lesions Interpreted by Human Readers and With Computer-Aided Detection
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2009; 193(1): 70 - 78.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
D. Regge, C. Laudi, G. Galatola, P. Della Monica, L. Bonelli, G. Angelelli, R. Asnaghi, B. Barbaro, C. Bartolozzi, D. Bielen, et al.
Diagnostic Accuracy of Computed Tomographic Colonography for the Detection of Advanced Neoplasia in Individuals at Increased Risk of Colorectal Cancer
JAMA, June 17, 2009; 301(23): 2453 - 2461.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
K. T. Johnson, J. G. Fletcher, and C. D. Johnson
Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) Using 360{degrees} Virtual Dissection: Can CAD in a First Reviewer Paradigm Be a Reliable Substitute for Primary 2D or 3D Search?
Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2007; 189(4): W172 - W176.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. G. Fletcher, F. Booya, R. M. Summers, D. Roy, L. Guendel, B. Schmidt, C. H. McCollough, and J. L. Fidler
Comparative Performance of Two Polyp Detection Systems on CT Colonography
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2007; 189(2): 277 - 282.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
T. Mang, A. Maier, C. Plank, C. Mueller-Mang, C. Herold, and W. Schima
Pitfalls in Multi-Detector Row CT Colonography: A Systematic Approach
RadioGraphics, March 1, 2007; 27(2): 431 - 454.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. H. Park, H. K. Ha, A. Y. Kim, K. W. Kim, M.-G. Lee, P. N. Kim, Y. M. Shin, J.-S. Byeon, S.-K. Yang, J. H. Kim, et al.
Flat polyps of the colon: detection with 16-MDCT colonography--preliminary results.
Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2006; 186(6): 1611 - 1617.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
R. L. MacCarty, C. D. Johnson, J. G. Fletcher, and L. A. Wilson
Occult Colorectal Polyps on CT Colonography: Implications for Surveillance.
Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2006; 186(5): 1380 - 1383.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
K. T. Johnson, C. D. Johnson, J. G. Fletcher, R. L. MacCarty, and R. L. Summers
CT Colonography Using 360{degrees} Virtual Dissection: A Feasibility Study
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2006; 186(1): 90 - 95.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. H. Park, H. K. Ha, M.-J. Kim, K. W. Kim, A. Y. Kim, D. H. Yang, M.-G. Lee, P. N. Kim, Y. M. Shin, S.-K. Yang, et al.
False-Negative Results at Multi-Detector Row CT Colonography: Multivariate Analysis of Causes for Missed Lesions
Radiology, May 1, 2005; 235(2): 495 - 502.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.