Electronic colon-cleansing for CT colonography: diagnostic performance

Comparison of the performance of conventional and spectral-based tagged stool cleansing algorithms at CT colonography

OBJECTIVES

To compare the performance of conventional versus spectral-based electronic stool cleansing for iodine-tagged CT colonography (CTC) using a dual-layer spectral detector scanner.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated iodine contrast stool-tagged CTC scans of 30 consecutive patients (mean age: 69 ± 8 years) undergoing colorectal cancer screening obtained on a dual-layer spectral detector CT scanner. One reader identified locations of electronic cleansing artifacts (n = 229) on conventional and spectral cleansed images. Three additional independent readers evaluated these locations using a conventional cleansing algorithm (Intellispace Portal) and two experimental spectral cleansing algorithms (i.e., fully transparent and translucent tagged stool). For each cleansed image set, readers recorded the severity of over- and under-cleansing artifacts on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = none to 4 = severe) and readability compared to uncleansed images. Wilcoxon's signed-rank tests were used to assess artifact severity, type, and readability (worse, unchanged, or better).

RESULTS

Compared with conventional cleansing (66% score ≥ 2), the severity of overall cleansing artifacts was lower in transparent (60% score ≥ 2, p = 0.011) and translucent (50% score ≥ 2, p < 0.001) spectral cleansing. Under-cleansing artifact severity was lower in transparent (49% score ≥ 2, p < 0.001) and translucent (39% score ≥ 2, p < 0.001) spectral cleansing compared with conventional cleansing (60% score ≥ 2). Over-cleansing artifact severity was worse in transparent (17% score ≥ 2, p < 0.001) and translucent (14% score ≥ 2, p = 0.023) spectral cleansing compared with conventional cleansing (9% score ≥ 2). Overall readability was significantly improved in transparent (p < 0.001) and translucent (p < 0.001) spectral cleansing compared with conventional cleansing.

CONCLUSIONS

Spectral cleansing provided more robust electronic stool cleansing of iodine-tagged stool at CTC than conventional cleansing.

KEY POINTS

• Spectral-based electronic cleansing of tagged stool at CT colonography provides higher quality images with less perception of artifacts than does conventional cleansing. • Spectral-based electronic cleansing could potentially advance minimally cathartic approach for CT colonography. Further clinical trials are warranted.

Electronic cleansing of tagged residue in CT colonography: what radiologists need to know

CT colonography (CTC) is the radiological examination of choice for the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia. Faecal tagging is considered a mandatory part of bowel preparation. However, the colonic mucosa, obscured by tagged residue, is not accessible to endoluminal 3D views and requires time-consuming 2D evaluation. Electronic cleansing (EC) software algorithms can overcome this limitation by digitally subtracting tagged residue from the colonic lumen. Ideally, this enables a seamless 3D endoluminal evaluation. Despite this benefit, EC is a potential source of a wide range of artefacts. Accurate EC requires proper CTC examination technique and faecal tagging. The digital subtraction process has been shown to affect the relevant morphological features of both colonic anatomy and colonic lesions, if submerged under faecal residue. This article summarises the potential effects of EC on CTC imaging, the consequences for reporting and patient management, and strategies to avoid pitfalls. Furthermore, potentially negative effects on clinical reporting and patient management are shown, and problem-solving techniques, as well as recommendations for the appropriate use of EC techniques, are presented. Radiologists using EC should be familiar with EC-related effects on polyp size and also with correct measurement techniques.

CT colonography: size reduction of submerged colorectal polyps due to electronic cleansing and CT-window settings

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether electronic cleansing (EC) of tagged residue and different computed tomography (CT) windows influence the size of colorectal polyps in CT colonography (CTC).

METHODS

A database of 894 colonoscopy-validated CTC datasets of a low-prevalence cohort was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients with polyps ≥6 mm that were entirely submerged in tagged residue. Ten radiologists independently measured the largest diameter of each polyp, two-dimensionally, before and after EC in colon, bone, and soft-tissue-windows, in randomised order. Differences in size and polyp count before and after EC were calculated for size categories ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm. Statistical testing involved 95% confidence interval, intraclass correlation and mixed-model ANOVA.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients with 48 polyps were included. Mean polyp size before EC was 9.8 mm in colon, 9.9 mm in bone and 8.2 mm in soft-tissue windows. After EC, the mean polyp size decreased significantly to 9.4 mm in colon, 9.1 mm in bone and 7.1 mm in soft-tissue windows. Compared to unsubtracted colon windows, EC, performed in colon, bone and soft-tissue windows, led to a shift of 6 (12,5%), 10 (20.8%) and 25 (52.1%) polyps ≥6 mm into the next smaller size category, thus affecting patient risk stratification.

CONCLUSIONS

EC and narrow CT windows significantly reduce the size of polyps submerged in tagged residue. Polyp measurements should be performed in unsubtracted colon windows.

KEY POINTS

• EC significantly reduces the size of polyps submerged in tagged residue. • Abdominal CT-window settings significantly underestimate 2D sizes of submerged polyps. • Size reduction in EC is significantly greater in narrow than wide windows. • Underestimation of polyp size due to EC may lead to inadequate treatment. • Polyp measurements should be performed in unsubtracted images using a colon window.

Electronic cleansing for 24-h limited bowel preparation CT colonography using principal curvature flow

CT colonography (CTC) is one of the recommended methods for colorectal cancer screening. The subject's preparation is one of the most burdensome aspects of CTC with a cathartic bowel preparation. Tagging of the bowel content with an oral contrast medium facilitates CTC with limited bowel preparation. Unfortunately, such preparations adversely affect the 3-D image quality. Thus far, data acquired after very limited bowel preparation were evaluated with a 2-D reading strategy only. Existing cleansing algorithms do not work sufficiently well to allow a primary 3-D reading strategy. We developed an electronic cleansing algorithm, aimed to realize optimal 3-D image quality for low-dose CTC with 24-h limited bowel preparation. The method employs a principal curvature flow algorithm to remove heterogeneities within poorly tagged fecal residue. In addition, a pattern recognition-based approach is used to prevent polyp-like protrusions on the colon surface from being removed by the method. Two experts independently evaluated 40 CTC cases by means of a primary 2-D approach without involvement of electronic cleansing as well as by a primary 3-D method after electronic cleansing. The data contained four variations of 24-h limited bowel preparation and was based on a low radiation dose scanning protocol. The sensitivity for lesions ≥ 6 mm was significantly higher for the primary 3-D reading strategy (84%) than for the primary 2-D reading strategy (68%) (p = 0.031). The reading time was increased from 5:39 min (2-D) to 7:09 min (3-D) (p = 0.005); the readers' confidence was reduced from 2.3 (2-D) to 2.1 (3-D) ( p = 0.013) on a three-point Likert scale. Polyp conspicuity for cleansed submerged lesions was similar to not submerged lesions (p = 0.06). To our knowledge, this study is the first to describe and clinically validate an electronic cleansing algorithm that facilitates low-dose CTC with 24-h limited bowel preparation.

Colon segmentation for prepless virtual colonoscopy

A novel segmentation framework for a prepless virtual colonoscopy (VC) is presented, which reduces the necessity for colon cleansing before the CT scan. The patient is injected rectally with a water-soluble iodinated contrast medium using manual insufflators and a small rectal catheter. Compared to the air-based contrast medium, this technique can better preserve the color lumen and reduce the partial volume effect. However, the contrast medium, together with the fecal materials and air, makes colon wall segmentation challenging. Our solution makes no assumptions about the shape, size, and location of the fecal material in the colon. This generality allows us to label the fecal material accurately and extract the colon wall reliably. The accuracy of our technique has been verified on 60 human subjects. Compared with current VC technologies, our method is shown to be better in terms of both sensitivity and specificity. Further, in our experiments, the accuracy of the technique was comparable to that of optical colonoscopy results.

Primary uncleansed 2D versus primary electronically cleansed 3D in limited bowel preparation CT-colonography. Is there a difference for novices and experienced readers?

The purpose of this study was to compare a primary uncleansed 2D and a primary electronically cleansed 3D reading strategy in CTC in limited prepped patients. Seventy-two patients received a low-fibre diet with oral iodine before CT-colonography. Six novices and two experienced observers reviewed both cleansed and uncleansed examinations in randomized order. Mean per-polyp sensitivity was compared between the methods by using generalized estimating equations. Mean per-patient sensitivity, and specificity were compared using the McNemar test. Results were stratified for experience (experienced observers versus novice observers). Mean per-polyp sensitivity for polyps 6 mm or larger was significantly higher for novices using cleansed 3D (65%; 95%CI 57–73%) compared with uncleansed 2D (51%; 95%CI 44–59%). For experienced observers there was no significant difference. Mean per-patient sensitivity for polyps 6 mm or larger was significantly higher for novices as well: respectively 75% (95%CI 70–80%) versus 64% (95%CI 59–70%). For experienced observers there was no statistically significant difference. Specificity for both novices and experienced observers was not significantly different. For novices primary electronically cleansed 3D is better for polyp detection than primary uncleansed 2D.