Extracolonic findings in patients undergoing abdomino-pelvic CT for suspected colorectal carcinoma in the frail and disabled patient

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in patients with signs or symptoms of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC): a joint guideline from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has a high sensitivity for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). In a symptomatic population FIT may identify those patients who require colorectal investigation with the highest priority. FIT offers considerable advantages over the use of symptoms alone, as an objective measure of risk with a vastly superior positive predictive value for CRC, while conversely identifying a truly low risk cohort of patients. The aim of this guideline was to provide a clear strategy for the use of FIT in the diagnostic pathway of people with signs or symptoms of a suspected diagnosis of CRC. The guideline was jointly developed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology, specifically by a 21-member multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG). A systematic review of 13 535 publications was undertaken to develop 23 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the triage of people with symptoms of a suspected CRC diagnosis in primary care. In order to achieve consensus among a broad group of key stakeholders, we completed an extended Delphi of the GDG, and also 61 other individuals across the UK and Ireland, including by members of the public, charities and primary and secondary care. Seventeen research recommendations were also prioritised to inform clinical management.

The bowel and beyond: extracolonic findings from CT colonography

CT colonography has emerged as the investigation of choice for suspected colorectal cancer in patients when a colonoscopy in incomplete, is deemed high risk or is declined because of patient preference. Unlike a traditional colonoscopy, it frequently reveals extracolonic as well as colonic findings. Our study aimed to determine the prevalence, characteristics and potential significance of extracolonic findings on CT colonography within our own institution. A retrospective review was performed of 502 patients who underwent CT colonography in our institution between January 1, 2010 and January 4, 2015. Of 502 patients, 60.63% had at least one extracolonic finding. This was close to other similar-sized studies (Kumar et al. Radiology 236(2):519-526, 2005). However, our rate of E4 findings was significantly higher than that reported in larger studies at 5.3%(Pooler et al. AJR 206:313-318, 2016). The difference may be explained by our combination of symptomatic/screening patients or by the age and gender distribution of our population. Our study lends support to the hypothesis that CT colonography may be particularly useful in identifying clinically significant extracolonic findings in symptomatic patients. CT colonography may allow early identification of extracolonic malignancies and life-threatening conditions such as an abdominal aortic aneurysm at a preclinical stage when they are amenable to medical or surgical intervention. However, extracolonic findings may also result in unnecessary investigations for subsequently benign findings.

Computed tomographic colonography compared with colonoscopy or barium enema for diagnosis of colorectal cancer in older symptomatic patients: two multicentre randomised trials with economic evaluation (the SIGGAR trials)

BACKGROUND

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a relatively new diagnostic test that may be superior to existing alternatives to investigate the large bowel.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic efficacy, acceptability, safety and cost-effectiveness of CTC with barium enema (BE) or colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Parallel randomised trials: BE compared with CTC and colonoscopy compared with CTC (randomisation 2 : 1, respectively).

SETTING

A total of 21 NHS hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged ≥ 55 years with symptoms suggestive of colorectal cancer (CRC).

INTERVENTIONS

CTC, BE and colonoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

For the trial of CTC compared with BE, the primary outcome was the detection rate of CRC and large polyps (≥ 10 mm), with the proportion of patients referred for additional colonic investigation as a secondary outcome. For the trial of CTC compared with colonoscopy, the primary outcome was the proportion of patients referred for additional colonic investigation, with the detection rate of CRC and large polyps as a secondary outcome. Secondary outcomes for both trials were miss rates for cancer (via registry data), all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, patient acceptability, extracolonic pathology and cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

A total of 8484 patients were registered and 5384 were randomised and analysed (BE trial: 2527 BE, 1277 CTC; colonoscopy trial: 1047 colonoscopy, 533 CTC). Detection rates in the BE trial were 7.3% (93/1277) for CTC, compared with 5.6% (141/2527) for BE (p = 0.0390). The difference was due to better detection of large polyps by CTC (3.6% vs. 2.2%; p = 0.0098), with no significant difference for cancer (3.7% vs. 3.4%; p = 0.66). Significantly more patients having CTC underwent additional investigation (23.5% vs. 18.3%; p = 0.0003). At the 3-year follow-up, the miss rate for CRC was 6.7% for CTC (three missed cancers) and 14.1% for BE (12 missed cancers). Significantly more patients randomised to CTC than to colonoscopy underwent additional investigation (30% vs. 8.2%; p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in detection rates for cancer or large polyps (10.7% for CTC vs. 11.4% for colonoscopy; p = 0.69), with no difference when cancers (p = 0.94) and large polyps (p = 0.53) were analysed separately. At the 3-year follow-up, the miss rate for cancer was nil for colonoscopy and 3.4% for CTC (one missed cancer). Adverse events were uncommon for all procedures. In 1042 of 1748 (59.6%) CTC examinations, at least one extracolonic finding was reported, and this proportion increased with age (p < 0.0001). A total of 149 patients (8.5%) were subsequently investigated, and extracolonic neoplasia was diagnosed in 79 patients (4.5%) and malignancy in 29 (1.7%). In the short term, CTC was significantly more acceptable to patients than BE or colonoscopy. Total costs for CTC and colonoscopy were finely balanced, but CTC was associated with higher health-care costs than BE. The cost per large polyp or cancer detected was £4235 (95% confidence interval £395 to £9656).

CONCLUSIONS

CTC is superior to BE for detection of cancers and large polyps in symptomatic patients. CTC and colonoscopy detect a similar proportion of large polyps and cancers and their costs are also similar. CTC precipitates significantly more additional investigations than either BE or colonoscopy, and evidence-based referral criteria are needed. Further work is recommended to clarify the extent to which patients initially referred for colonoscopy or BE undergo subsequent abdominopelvic imaging, for example by computed tomography, which will have a significant impact on health economic estimates.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN95152621.

Identification of Extracolonic Pathologies by Computed Tomographic Colonography in Colorectal Cancer Symptomatic Patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Symptoms suggestive of colorectal cancer may originate outside the colorectum. Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is used to examine the colorectum and abdominopelvic organs simultaneously. We performed a prospective randomized controlled trial to quantify the frequency, nature, and consequences of extracolonic findings.

METHODS

We studied 5384 patients from 21 UK National Health Service hospitals referred by their family doctor for the investigation of colorectal cancer symptoms from March 2004 through December 2007. The patients were assigned randomly to groups that received the requested test (barium enema or colonoscopy, n = 3574) or CTC (n = 1810). We determined the frequency and nature of extracolonic findings, subsequent investigations, ultimate diagnosis, and extracolonic cancer diagnoses 1 and 3 years after testing patients without colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

Extracolonic pathologies were detected in 959 patients by CTC (58.7%), in 42 patients by barium enema analysis (1.9%), and in no patients by colonoscopy. Extracolonic findings were investigated in 142 patients (14.2%) and a diagnosis was made for 126 patients (88.1%). Symptoms were explained by extracolonic findings in 4 patients analyzed by barium enema (0.2%) and in 33 patients analyzed by CTC (2.8%). CTC identified 72 extracolonic neoplasms, however, barium enema analysis found only 3 (colonoscopy found none). Overall, CTC diagnosed extracolonic neoplasms in 72 of 1634 patients (4.4%); 26 of these were malignant (1.6%). There were significantly more extracolonic malignancies detected than expected 1 year after examination, but these did not differ between patients evaluated by CTC (22.2/1000 person-years), barium enema (26.5/1000 person-years; P = .43), or colonoscopy (32.0/1000 person-years; P = .88).

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of the patients with symptoms of colorectal cancer are found to have extracolonic pathologies by CTC analysis. However, the proportion of patients found to have extracolonic malignancies after 1 year of CTC examination is not significantly greater than after barium enema or colonoscopy examinations. International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials no: 95152621.isrctn.com.

Extracolonic findings at CT colonography: a review of 258 consecutive cases

INTRODUCTION

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a non-invasive method of examining the colon and is used for colorectal polyp and mass diagnosis. As the entire abdomen is examined, incidental extracolonic pathologies can be diagnosed. The types of extracolonic findings (ECFs) and their frequency have not been explored in an Australian setting.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all CTC examinations performed in an Australian tertiary hospital between February 2004 and July 2009 were reviewed to extract patient demographic data, reason for referral, presence of colonic polyps and masses, presence of other colonic and extracolonic pathologies. Statistical significance was determined using a Student's t-test or Fisher's exact test where appropriate.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-eight CTC examinations were performed and an ECF was present in 70.1% and were more common with increasing age (P ≤ 0.01), but were not related to gender, or source of referral or the presence of colonic findings. Major ECFs were diagnosed in 8.9% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

ECFs are more frequent with increasing age and although they are common, only a minority are of high significance.

Prevalence of extravascular collateral findings during 64-slice CT angiography of the abdominal aorta and lower limbs

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of extravascular collateral findings during 64-slice CT angiography of the abdominal aorta (AA-CTA) and lower limbs (LL-CTA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The images of 536 AA-CTA and LL-CTA examinations performed for suspected aortic and peripheral vascular disease in 500 patients were retrospectively reviewed. Two radiologists evaluated the 5-mm axial images independently using appropriate window settings for the area under investigation. Collateral findings were divided according to their clinical significance into significant, nonsignificant and meriting further investigation.

RESULTS

No collateral findings were identified in 97/500 patients (19.4%). In the remaining patients, 821 collateral findings were detected, of which 43 (5.24%) were classified as significant, 135 (16.44%) as meriting further investigation and 643 (78.32%) as nonsignificant. The findings indicative of the presence of a malignant lesion totalled 36 (4.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

AA-CTA and LL-CTA demonstrate a nonnegligible prevalence of collateral findings, many of them major. It therefore appears that the evaluation should focus not only on the image reconstructions to identify vascular disease, but also on the native axial images to detect incidental findings.

Incidental findings in imaging diagnostic tests: a systematic review

The objective of this review is to summarise the available evidence on the frequency and management of incidental findings in imaging diagnostic tests. Original articles were identified by a systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library Plus databases using appropriate medical headings. Extracted variables were study design; sample size; type of imaging test; initial diagnosis; frequency and location of incidental findings; whether clinical follow-up was performed; and whether a definitive diagnosis was made. Study characteristics were assessed by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Any disagreement was solved by consensus. The relationship between the frequency of incidental findings and the study characteristics was assessed using a one-way ANOVA test, as was the frequency of follow-up of incidental findings and the frequency of confirmation. 251 potentially relevant abstracts were identified and 44 articles were finally included in the review. Overall, the mean frequency of incidental findings was 23.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 15.8-31.3%). The frequency of incidental findings was higher in studies involving CT technology (mean 31.1%, 95% CI 20.1-41.9%), in patients with an unspecific initial diagnosis (mean 30.5, 95% CI 0-81.6) and when the location of the incidental findings was unspecified (mean 33.9%, 95% CI 18.1-49.7). The mean frequency of clinical follow-up was 64.5% (95% CI 52.9-76.1%) and mean frequency of clinical confirmation was 45.6% (95% CI 32.1-59.2%). Although the optimal strategy for the management of these abnormalities is still unclear, it is essential to be aware of the low clinical confirmation in findings of moderate and major importance.

Reduction of perception error by double reporting of minimal preparation CT colon

Minimal preparation CT colon (MPCTC) is a useful test for frail elderly patients, who tolerate full bowel preparation poorly, and has the potential advantage of identifying extra-colonic pathology. Double reporting has been shown to reduce perception errors in a variety of radiological investigations, and we sought to determine its usefulness for MPCTC. A prospective consecutive cohort of 186 patients undergoing MPCTC for lower gastrointestinal symptoms was double reported. Radiologists were blinded to each report. Data for each report were divided into colonic and extra-colonic findings, with the latter being graded as clinically relevant or irrelevant. Discrepancies between the two reports were identified. A positive colonic lesion was defined as one where direct endoscopic visualisation was recommended. A clinically relevant extra-colonic lesion was defined as one that could impact on future patient management. 13% (24/186) of patients had a significant colonic lesion; 7 of these were identified only by 1 observer, although only 1 was confirmed endoscopically to be cancer. The positive predictive value for colon cancer was 69% for single reporting and 54.5% for double reporting. There were 67 clinically relevant extra-colonic lesions, and 25 of these were reported only by only 1 observer. In conclusion, double reporting found one extra-colonic cancer, but at the expense of five unnecessary endoscopic procedures. This seems a reasonable trade-off and we would therefore recommend double reporting. However, implementation would have a significant impact on manpower and service delivery.

Issues in medical exposures

Medical exposures account, on average, for some 14% of the background ionising radiation exposure in the UK and form the great majority of the non-natural component. In the United States of America, medical exposures comprised over 50% of the total in 2006. This is due primarily to an increase in x-ray computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET) procedures. This paper highlights the potential problems in the use of CT scanning to investigate the asymptomatic individual, where the traditional risk/benefit considerations are less clear-cut than in conventional clinical situations. It draws on a recent COMARE report which examined the use of CT for whole body, heart, lung and colon studies. The number of PET facilities is increasing rapidly in the UK and, in addition to considerations of radiation dose to subjects, careful planning is necessary to limit doses to staff. In non-ionising radiation, a topic of keen interest at present is the use of increasingly powerful sunbeds, particularly by those aged under 18. Legislation and regulation vary widely across Europe and the Scottish Parliament has recently introduced the first UK regulation. It is suggested that further research is required into the effects of current UV systems and the reasons why tanning is thought so desirable by Caucasians. Lastly, a number of issues requiring radiobiological and epidemiological input are considered and actions to satisfy these identified.

Unexpected findings at imaging: predicting frequency in various types of studies

OBJECTIVE

: The objective was to evaluate the prevalence and associated variables of unsuspected findings from imaging tests in clinical practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

: Cross-sectional study of patients referred for an imaging test in 2006. Two independent radiologists classified the imaging tests according to the presence or absence of an unexpected finding in relation with the causes that prompted the test (kappa=0.95). A thorough chart review of these patients was carried out as a quality control.

RESULTS

: Out of 3259 patients in the study, 488 revealed unsuspected findings (15.0%). The prevalence of abnormal findings varied according to age: from 20.4% (150/734) in the over 74-group to 9.0% (76/847) in the under 43-group. The largest prevalence was in the category of infectious diseases (14/49, 28.6%) and in CT (260/901, 28.9%) and ultrasound (138/668, 20.7%). Studies showing moderate clinical information on the referral form were less likely to show unexpected findings than those with null or minor information (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.36-0.73).

CONCLUSION

: Clinicians should expect the frequency of diseases detectable by imaging to increase in the future. Further research with follow-up of these findings is needed to estimate the effect of imaging technologies on final health outcomes.

Palliation of obstructing malignant colonic lesions using self-expanding metal stents: a single-center experience

To evaluate the efficacy, risks, and survival after palliative colorectal stenting at a single center, we conducted a retrospective review of consecutive patients who had colorectal self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) inserted over an 8-year period (September 1998 to September 2006) to relieve an obstructing colorectal tumor. All patients either had proven distant metastases or were unfit for surgical decompression. A single interventional radiologist (R.M.) inserted the stents, which were either Memotherm or WallFlex. Ninety-one patients with a median age of 73 years had a colorectal stent inserted for palliation of an obstructing colorectal malignancy. Technical success was achieved in 81 of 91 (89%) patients, and clinical success in 80 of 81 (99%). At the time of analysis (December 2006), 13 of 91 (14.2%) patients were alive. The patients who died had a median survival of 59 days, IQR 17-181 days. Seven (7/81) patients suffered stent migration, which occurred 10.3 days (IQR, 5-14 days) after the procedure. Three patients (3/81) re-presented with intestinal obstruction secondary to tumor ingrowth and 10 (10.9%) patients suffered bowel perforation. Ten patients (10.9%) had two stents inserted coaxially and overlapping in one procedure. This was performed in cases where the stricture was too long to be easily crossed by a single stent. We conclude that colorectal SEMS is a safe and effective mode of treatment for the palliation of obstructing colorectal cancers, which avoids high-risk surgery.

Minimal-preparation abdomino-pelvic CT in frail and elderly patients: prognostic value of colonic and extracolonic findings

AIM

To examine the overall survival of patients who had had been referred for minimal preparation abdomino-pelvic computed tomography (MPCT), and to assess the prognostic value of the colonic and extracolonic findings detected.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The survival of a cohort of 1029 elderly and frail patients, with clinical symptoms and signs suspicious for colorectal cancer (CRC), who had undergone MPCT between 1995 and 1998 was investigated. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were undertaken according to the presence of CRC and extracolonic abnormalities (ECA).

RESULTS

The median age of the 1029 patients was 79.4 years. The overall median survival following MPCT was 5.4 years; and 6.6 years if no abnormality was detected. On multivariate analysis, age, sex, CRC status, and number of ECAs were significant factors in overall survival. Median survival for those with confirmed CRC [n=91 (prevalence, 8.8%)] was 1.1 years, compared with 5.9 years without CRC (p<0.0001); and 2.4 years for those with one or more ECA [n=245 (prevalence, 23.8%)], compared with 6.1 years without ECA (p<0.0001). Survival was progressively shorter for increasing numbers of ECAs; and shorter for previously unknown non-CRC malignancies (n=24) compared with CRC (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

MPCT appears to have prognostic potential in this patient population, with significant reductions in survival if a CRC or ECA is detected. The detection of ECA would appear to have at least as important an impact on the usefulness of the examination as the detection of CRC.

Extravascular incidental findings at multislice CT angiography of the abdominal aorta and lower extremity arteries: a retrospective review study

PURPOSE

To assess the frequency and clinical impact of extravascular incidental findings on routine CT angiography of abdominal aorta or lower extremity arteries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2002 to July 2004, a total of 692 patients underwent CT angiography of abdominal aorta and lower extremity arteries. Two radiologists retrospectively reviewed by consensus cross-sectional images for the presence and clinical impact definition of extravascular findings. The revision of hospital charts, medical records, and all procedures' reports performed before and after CT angiography represented the standard of reference (SOR).

RESULTS

Only 373 out of 605 patients in whom extravascular findings were found had a SOR; in these patients CT angiography obtained a true-positive incidental rate of 98.9% (369/373). For the clinical impact definition of CT-angiography incidental findings, a concordance with SOR was obtained in 56.3% of patients, whereas a subsequent investigation was required in 183 patients (183/369, 49.6%). Among clinically relevant incidental findings, a total of 35 malignancies (35/894, 3.9%) were detected in 20 patients (20/423, 4.7%); in 15 patients (15/423, 3.5%) malignancy was unknown before CT-angiography exam.

CONCLUSIONS

A careful observation of cross-sectional images, even if "time consuming", is mandatory not only to assess vascular findings but also to avoid a misdiagnosis of clinical relevant extravascular findings.

Incidental findings on renal MR angiography

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to assess the incidence of incidental vascular and nonvascular findings in patients undergoing renal MR angiography and to determine the extent to which these findings alter patient management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Reports from 380 consecutive renal MR angiography examinations performed at a single institution over a 12-month interval were examined. The presence of incidental vascular (i.e., nonrenal artery) and nonvascular findings was noted. Clinical records of patients with significant incidental findings were examined to determine whether additional imaging, biopsy, or surgery was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 151 (40%) of 380 patients had one or more additional vascular findings not related to the renal arteries, and 221 (58%) of 380 patients had one or more additional nonvascular findings. Vascular findings included mesenteric artery stenosis or occlusion in 33% of patients, moderate to severe aortic atherosclerosis in 17%, aortic aneurysms in 7%, and aortic dissection in 2%. Incidental malignancies were detected in 10 patients (3%), and indeterminate lesions requiring follow-up imaging, biopsy, or surgery were noted in 18 patients (5%). Overall, management in 5% of patients was significantly altered (i.e., required biopsy, surgery, or other intervention) by incidental findings detected on renal MR angiography. Benign lesions not requiring additional imaging or follow-up occurred in 54% of patients and consisted predominantly of renal cysts.

CONCLUSION

Incidental findings on renal MR angiography are common. Most incidental lesions can be adequately detected and characterized with the addition of a few pulse sequences to the standard renal MR angiography protocol at a minimal cost in imaging time. The high incidence of incidental findings emphasizes the importance of performance and interpretation of these examinations by physicians with training in abdominal cross-sectional imaging.

Economic and ethical impact of extrarenal findings on potential living kidney donor assessment with computed tomography angiography

To determine the prevalence and spectrum of extrarenal findings in a screening population of potential living kidney donors undergoing renal Computed tomography angiography (CTA) and evaluate their impact on subsequent patient management and imaging costs. Two radiologists retrospectively reviewed 175 consecutive renal CTA's performed for assessment of potential living kidney donors. Extrarenal radiological findings were recorded and classified according to high, medium, or low importance based on clinical relevance and the need for further investigations and/or treatment. The cost of additional imaging examinations was calculated using 2002 Canadian (British Columbia) reimbursements. There were 73 extrarenal findings in 71/175 (40.6%) of the potential kidney donors in the study population. Findings were categorized as of high clinical importance in 18 (10.3%) cases, including lung lesions, bowel tumors, and liver tumors and as medium importance in 31 (17.7%). Twenty-two (12.6%) individuals had findings categorized as low importance, probably of no clinical significance and requiring no follow-up. Further potential evaluation of the 49 patients (28%) with highly and moderately significant extrarenal findings may require an additional $6137 (mean $35.1 per each case of all the screened patients). Transplantation of a kidney from a living donor is an excellent alternative to cadaveric allografts. Potential living kidney donors are a highly selected population of healthy individuals, screened for significant past or current medical conditions before undergoing CTA. Despite this screening, potentially significant extrarenal findings (classified as high or medium importance) were revealed in 28% of patients. These patients may require further investigations and/or treatment. The referring physician and patient should be aware of such potentially high probability, which may require further nontransplant related evaluation and treatment. This has medical, legal, economic, and ethical implications.

Neglectable benefit of searching for incidental findings in the Dutch--Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON) using low-dose multidetector CT

The purpose of this study was to prospectively determine the frequency and spectrum of incidental findings (IFs) and their clinical implications in a high risk population for lung cancer undergoing low-dose multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) screening for lung cancer. Scans of 1,929 participants were evaluated for lung lesions and IFs by two radiologists. IFs were categorised as not clinically relevant or possibly clinically relevant. Findings were considered possibly clinically relevant if they could require further evaluation or could have substantial clinical implications. All possibly clinically relevant IFs were reviewed by a third radiologist, who determined its clinical relevance. Of all 1,929 participants, 1,410 (73%) had not clinically relevant IFs and 163 (8%) had possibly clinically relevant IFs of which 129 (79%) were indeed considered clinically relevant. Additional imaging was performed mainly by ultrasound (112 of 118, 96%). All but one lesion were concluded to be benign, mostly cysts (n = 115, 80%). Only 21 (1%) participants had findings with clinical implications. In one participant a malignancy was found, yet without any clinical benefit since no curative treatment was possible. Based on our results, we advise against systematically searching for and reporting of IFs in lung cancer screening studies using low-dose MDCT.

Resources and costs associated with incidental extracolonic findings from CT colonogaphy: a study in a symptomatic population

CT colonography (CTC) is increasingly used to detect colonic polyps and cancers, but its impact in practice is also influenced by frequent detection of extracolonic lesions. We have previously documented the frequency and nature of such lesions. The current study was performed to assess the clinical resources and costs associated with the investigation and treatment of extracolonic lesions. We reviewed the reports of 225 consecutive CTC examinations carried out on patients with symptoms of bowel cancer. 116 of the 225 were reported to have one or more extracolonic findings. All 116 patients with an abnormality were followed up for 12-24 months. 24 patients underwent further actions (outpatient attendance, investigations, or surgical procedures) as a result of previously undiagnosed lesions unrelated to bowel cancer. The costs of these further actions were derived from the NHS Reference Costs manual 2004. The total cost for further investigations and interventions was 34,329 pounds sterling and the mean cost over the sample of 225 patients was 153 pounds sterling--more than the cost of the CTC itself. The costs were mainly generated by surgical procedures. Resources consumed as a result of extracolonic findings approximately doubled the costs of diagnostic CTC. These costs, along with inconvenience, anxiety, morbidity and occasionally even mortality suffered by patients, must be offset by the good done to some of those with sub-clinical but potentially lethal diseases.

The diagnostic value of multiplanar reconstruction on MDCT colonography for the preoperative staging of colorectal cancer

The purpose of this study was to determine whether multiplanar reconstruction (MPR) images can improve the accuracy of MDCT-based colorectal cancer preoperative staging by receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Fifty-five patients with colorectal cancer underwent contrast-enhanced CT colonography using an 8- or 16-row scanner. Two separate interval reviews of the axial MDCT datasets with/without MPR images (coronal and sagittal) were performed independently by two radiologists blinded to both the colonoscopic and histopathologic results. At each review session, the radiologists were asked to determine the colorectal cancer TNM stage within the context of differentiating < or =T3 from T4, N0 from > or =N1 and M0 from M1 using a five-point confidence scale. The radiologists' performance for staging the colorectal cancer using axial CT datasets with/without MPR images was evaluated using ROC analysis. Sensitivities, specificities and interobserver agreement were assessed. When MPR images were added, significant improvement was achieved by both radiologists for differentiating N0 from > or =N1 in terms of both A(Z) (0.651 to 0.769; 0.573 to 0.713) and specificity (26.7 to 69.2%; 23.1 to 76.9%) (P<0.05). For T staging, ROC analysis failed to show a significant improvement in terms of differentiating < or =T3 from T4 for either radiologist (P>0.05), but a significant improvement in the specificity (70 to 90%; 80 to 92%) was achieved by one radiologist (P<0.05). In terms of the M staging, a significant improvement in the Az (0.844 to 0.996) was observed for the combined interpretation of the axial and MPR images by one radiologist (P<0.05). Furthermore, substantial or almost perfect interobserver agreement was achieved for all TNM stagings for the combined interpretations (kappa=0.641-0.866), whereas only fair to substantial agreement was achieved for the axial images alone (kappa=0.337-0.707). In conclusion, the combined interpretation of the axial and MPR MDCT images significantly improved the local staging of colorectal cancer compared with assessments based on axial images alone.

Minimal preparation CT for the diagnosis of suspected colorectal cancer in the frail and elderly patient

Colorectal cancer is a common malignancy with an increased incidence in the elderly population. Traditional methods of evaluating this disease have included double contrast barium enema and colonoscopy. Unfortunately, in the frail and elderly patient, these investigations can be difficult to perform and are often not tolerated. Minimal preparation computed tomography (MPCT) of the colon has been suggested as an alternative in this patient population. In this technique, no bowel preparation is used apart from the administration of oral contrast medium. The patient is imaged only in the supine position, without per rectal insufflation of gas or barium. This article reviews the experience to date of MPCT in detecting colonic tumours, and compares its efficacy to the traditional methods. A meta-analysis of the studies allowed estimation of the pooled sensitivity of MPCT to be 83% (95% confidence interval: 76-89%), and pooled specificity to be 90% (95% CI: 85-94%). An added advantage of MPCT is the ability to identify extra-colonic pathology, and this aspect is also reviewed. In addition, the common radiological features and pitfalls in identifying colonic tumours by MPCT are discussed.

Whole-body CT screening: spectrum of findings and recommendations in 1192 patients

PURPOSE

To retrospectively determine the frequency and spectrum of findings and recommendations reported with whole-body computed tomographic (CT) screening at a community screening center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This HIPAA-compliant study received institutional review board approval, with waiver of informed consent. The radiologic reports of 1192 consecutive patients who underwent whole-body CT screening of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis at an outpatient imaging center from January to June 2000 were reviewed. Scans were obtained with electron-beam CT without oral or intravenous contrast material. Reported imaging findings and recommendations were retrospectively tabulated and assigned scores. Descriptive statistics were used (means, standard deviations, and percentages); comparisons between subgroups were performed with univariate analysis of variance and chi(2) or Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

Screening was performed in 1192 patients (mean age, 54 years). Sixty-five percent (774 of 1192) were men and 35% (418 of 1192) were women. Nine hundred three (76%) of 1192 patients were self referred, and 1030 (86%) of 1192 subjects had at least one abnormal finding described in the whole-body CT screening report. There were a total of 3361 findings, with a mean of 2.8 per patient. Findings were described most frequently in the spine (1065 [32%] of 3361), abdominal blood vessels (561 [17%] of 3361), lungs (461 [14%] of 3361), kidneys (353 [11%] of 3361), and liver (183 [5%] of 3361). Four hundred forty-five (37%) patients received at least one recommendation for further evaluation. The most common recommendations were for additional imaging of the lungs or the kidneys.

CONCLUSION

With whole-body CT screening, findings were detected in a large number of subjects, and most findings were benign by description and required no further evaluation. Thirty-seven percent of patients had findings that elicited recommendations for additional evaluation, but further research is required to determine the clinical importance of these findings and the effect on patient care.

Extracolonic findings at CT colonography

CT colonography (CTC), also referred to as virtual colonoscopy, is a noninvasive CT examination of the colon. Usually performed without IV contrast, it allows detection of both intraluminal and extraluminal (extracolonic) disease. Several studies demonstrate that although extracolonic disease at CTC is found in the majority of patients, the detection of previously undiagnosed highly important findings (HIF) is much lower. The number of HIF can vary depending on the definition of an HIF, the patient population, as well as technical factors. This article will discuss the incidence and implication of detecting extracolonic findings at CTC.

Importance of extracolonic findings at IV contrast medium-enhanced CT colonography versus those at non-enhanced CT colonography

To compare the clinical importance of extracolonic findings at intravenous (IV) contrast-enhanced CT colonography versus those at non-enhanced CT colonography. IV contrast medium-enhanced (n=72) and non-enhanced (n=30) multidetector CT colonography was performed in 102 symptomatic patients followed by conventional colonoscopy on the same day. The impact of extracolonic findings on further work up and treatment was assessed by a review of patient records. Extracolonic findings were divided into two groups: either leading to further work up respectively having an impact on therapy or not. A total of 303 extracolonic findings were detected. Of those, 71% (215/303) were found on IV contrast-enhanced CT, and 29% (88/303) were found on non-enhanced CT colonography. The extracolonic findings in 25% (26/102) of all patients led to further work up or had an impact on therapy. Twenty-two of these patients underwent CT colonography with IV contrast enhancement, and four without. The percentage of extracolonic findings leading to further work up or having an impact on therapy was higher for IV contrast-enhanced (31%; 22/72) than for non-enhanced (13%; 4/30) CT scans (P=0.12). IV contrast-enhanced CT colonography produced more extracolonic findings than non-enhanced CT colonography. A substantially greater proportion of findings on IV contrast-enhanced CT colonography led to further work up and treatment than did non-enhanced CT colonography.

A prospective study assessing the efficacy of abdominal computed tomography scan without bowel preparation in diagnosing intestinal wall and luminal lesions in patients presenting to the emergency room with abdominal complaints

AIM: To evaluate the positive predictive value of abdominal non-prepared computed tomography (CT) for diagnosing intestinal lumen or wall lesions in patients presenting to the emergency room (ER) with abdominal complaints.

METHODS: For 1-year we prospectively evaluated all ER patients hospitalized after abdominal CT scan detected either intraluminal or intestinal wall lesions. These patients underwent colonoscopy serving as gold standard. Patients with prior abdominal pathology or CT findings of appendicitis or diverticulitis were excluded.

RESULTS: Five hundred and sixty-eight abdominopelvic CT scans were performed in the ER, 96 had positive colonic findings. Sixty-two patients were excluded, 46 because of diverticulitis or appendicitis, 16 because of prior abdominal pathology. Of the remaining 34 patients, 14 did not undergo colonoscopy during hospitalization. Twenty eligible patients were included in the study. The positive predictive value of the CT scans performed in the ER was calculated to be 45% (95% CI 25-67).

CONCLUSION: CT findings correlated with colonoscopic findings only in approximately half of the cases. Relying on non-prepared CT scan findings in planning patient management and colonoscopy may lead to unnecessary diagnostic work-ups.