AJR Custom publishing of AJR articles and ARRS Cat. Course
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sosna, J.
Right arrow Articles by Libson, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sosna, J.
Right arrow Articles by Libson, E.
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?
DOI:10.2214/AJR.07.2099
AJR 2008; 190:374-385
© American Roentgen Ray Society

Original Research

Critical Analysis of the Performance of Double-Contrast Barium Enema for Detecting Colorectal Polyps ≥ 6 mm in the Era of CT Colonography

Jacob Sosna1,2, Tamar Sella1, Oumar Sy3, Philip T. Lavin3, Ruth Eliahou1, Shifra Fraifeld1 and Eugene Libson1

1 Department of Radiology, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, POB 12000, Jerusalem, Israel.
2 Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA.
3 Boston Biostatistics Research Foundation, Framingham, MA.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing the performance of double-contrast barium enema (DCBE) with CT colonography (CTC) for the detection of colorectal polyps ≥ 6 mm using endoscopy as the gold standard.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Prospective DCBE and CTC studies were identified. Percentages of polyps and of patients with polyps ≥ 10 mm and 6–9 mm were abstracted. The performance of DCBE versus CTC was determined by separately evaluating each technique's performance versus that of endoscopy, and contrasting the techniques. The I-squared statistic and Fisher's exact test were used for heterogeneity, the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel and the Kruskal-Wallis tests for correlation, and the Az test for comparing pooled weighted estimates of performance.

RESULTS. Eleven studies of DCBE (5,995 patients, 1,548 polyps) and 30 studies of CTC (6,573 patients, 2,348 polyps) fulfilled inclusion criteria. For polyps ≥ 10 mm, a 0.121-perpatient sensitivity difference favored CTC (p < 0.0001; DCBE, 0.702 [95% CI, 0.687–0.715]; CTC, 0.823 [0.809–0.836]). For polyps ≥ 10 mm, a 0.031-per-polyp sensitivity difference favored CTC (p < 0.0001; DCBE, 0.715 [0.703–0.726]; CTC, 0.746 [0.735–0.757]). For polyps ≥ 10 mm, a specificity difference of 0.104 favored CTC (p = 0.001; DCBE, 0.850 [0.847–0.855]; CTC, 0.954 [0.952–0.955]). DCBE was also significantly less sensitive for 6- to 9-mm polyps (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION. DCBE has statistically lower sensitivity and specificity than CTC for detecting colorectal polyps ≥ 6 mm.

Keywords: barium enema • colonoscopy • CT colonography • double-contrast barium enema • meta-analysis • virtual colonoscopy


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?




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.