AJR InPractice
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 JACR Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McFarland, E. G.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, C. D.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by McFarland, E. G.
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 2009; 193:1242
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Abstract

ACR Colon Cancer Committee White Paper: Status of CT Colonography 2009

Elizabeth G. McFarland, Joel G. Fletcher*, Perry P. Pickhardt, Abraham Dachman, Judy Yee, Cynthia H. McCollough, Michael Macari, Paul Knechtges, Michael Zalis, Matthew Barish, David H. Kim, Kathryn Keysor and C. Daniel Johnson

Abstract

Purpose: To review the current status and rationale of the updated ACR practice guidelines for CT colonography (CTC).

Methods: Clinical validation trials in both the U.S. and Europe are reviewed. Key technical aspects of the CTC examination are emphasized, including low-dose protocols, proper insufflation, and bowel preparation. Important issues of implementation are discussed, including training and certification, definition of target lesion, reporting of colonic and extracolonic findings, quality metrics, reimbursement, and cost-effectiveness.

Results: Successful validation trials in screening cohorts both in the U.S. with ACRIN® and in Germany demonstrated sensitivity of 90% or greater for patients with polyps 10 mm or greater. Proper technique is critical, including low-dose techniques in screening cohorts with upper limits in CTDIvol of 12.5 mGy per exam. Training of new readers includes the requirement of interactive workstation training with 2-D and 3-D image display techniques. The target lesion is defined as a polyp 6 mm or greater, consistent with the American Cancer Society joint guidelines. Five quality metrics have been defined for CTC, with pilot data entered. Although the CMS national noncoverage decision in May 2009 was a disappointment, multiple third-party payers are reimbursing for screening CTC. Cost-effective modeling has shown CTC to be a dominant strategy, including in a Medicare cohort.

Conclusion: Supported by third party payer reimbursement for screening, CTC will continue to further transition into community practice and can provide an important adjunctive examination for colorectal screening.

Keywords: CT colonography • CTDIvol • 2-D and 3-D image display techniques • polyp


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 © 2009 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.