HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Johnson, C. D. Articles by Wilson, L. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Johnson, C. D. Articles by Wilson, L. A. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Effect of Slice Thickness and Primary 2D Versus 3D Virtual Dissection on Colorectal Lesion Detection at CT Colonography in 452 Asymptomatic Adults

¹ Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St., SW, Rochester, MN 55905.
² Department of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
³ Division of Gastroenterology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of our study was to compare the performance of primary 3D search using 360° virtual dissection with primary 2D search using a 2.5- versus a 1.25-mm slice thickness.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Four hundred fifty-two asymptomatic patients underwent CT colonography (CTC) and colonoscopy. Examinations were reconstructed to 1.25- and 2.5-mm slice thicknesses and interpreted using primary 3D search (360° virtual dissection) and primary 2D search. Two of three experienced reviewers were randomly assigned to each case; 1,808 interpretations were performed.

RESULTS. There were 64 adenomas 6 mm, 26 of which were large adenomas 1 cm. For adenomas 6–9 mm in diameter, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) using 2.5-mm data sets was 0.66, 0.62, 0.90 and 0.78, 0.69, 0.67 for reviewers 1, 2, and 3, respectively, using primary 3D versus 2D search (p = not significant [NS]). For neoplasms 10 mm, the AUC using 2.5-mm data sets was 0.74, 0.85, 0.89 and 0.66, 0.86, 0.92 for reviewers 1, 2, and 3 using primary 3D versus 2D search (p = NS). There was no significant difference using 1.25-mm collimation. Double review using both primary 3D and 2D search yielded sensitivities of 84% (16/19) and 95% (18/19) for large neoplasms ( 1 cm) using 2.5- and 1.25-mm data sets, respectively. Five of five (100%) adenocarcinomas were identified. The sensitivity of colonoscopy for large neoplasms was 77% (20/26) (20% [1/5] for adenocarcinoma).

CONCLUSION. No advantage exists for 1.25- or 2.5-mm slice thickness or for primary 3D versus 2D search at CTC. Double review using primary 3D (virtual dissection) and 2D search reduces interobserver variability and competes with colonoscopy for the detection of large lesions.

Keywords: colonoscopy • colorectal cancer • CT colonography • oncologic imaging • virtual dissection display

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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. J. Pickhardt, D. H. Kim, and C. Hassan The Effectiveness of Colonoscopy in Reducing Mortality From Colorectal Cancer Ann Intern Med, June 2, 2009; 150(11): 818 - 819. [Full Text] [PDF]

				U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Screening for Colorectal Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement Ann Intern Med, November 4, 2008; 149(9): 627 - 637. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. P. Whitlock, J. S. Lin, E. Liles, T. L. Beil, and R. Fu Screening for Colorectal Cancer: A Targeted, Updated Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Ann Intern Med, November 4, 2008; 149(9): 638 - 658. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. K. Rex, T. F. Imperiale, J. Regula, M. Polkowski, D. S. Glaser, L. F. Butterly, H. Pohl, D. H. Kim, and P. J. Pickhardt CT Colonography versus Colonoscopy for the Detection of Advanced Neoplasia N. Engl. J. Med., January 3, 2008; 358(1): 88 - 90. [Full Text] [PDF]