| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Computer Applications |
1 From the Department of Radiology, Rm S-056, 300 Pasteur Dr, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305. Received July 20, 1998; revision requested September 24; revision received November 18; accepted January 11, 1999. Supported in part by National Institutes of Health grants 1R01 CA72023, 1P41 RR09784-01, LM 07033; the Society for Computed Body Tomography and Magnetic Resonance; the Packard Foundation; the Lucas Foundation; and the Phil N. Allen Trust. C.F.B. is a 1997 RSNA Scholar. C.K. is a 1998 GENDEX/RSNA Medical Student/Scholar Assistant. Address reprint requests to C.F.B. (e-mail: cfb@s-word.stanford.edu).
PURPOSE: To determine the sensitivity of radiologist observers for detecting colonic polyps by using three different data review (display) modes for computed tomographic (CT) colonography, or "virtual colonoscopy."
MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT colonographic data in a patient with a normal colon were used as base data for insertion of digitally synthesized polyps. Forty such polyps (3.5, 5, 7, and 10 mm in diameter) were randomly inserted in four copies of the base data. Axial CT studies, volume-rendered virtual endoscopic movies, and studies from a three-dimensional mode termed "panoramic endoscopy" were reviewed blindly and independently by two radiologists.
RESULTS: Detection improved with increasing polyp size. Trends in sensitivity were dependent on whether all inserted lesions or only visible lesions were considered, because modes differed in how completely the colonic surface was depicted. For both reviewers and all polyps 7 mm or larger, panoramic endoscopy resulted in significantly greater sensitivity (90%) than did virtual endoscopy (68%, P = .014). For visible lesions only, the sensitivities were 85%, 81%, and 60% for one reader and 65%, 62%, and 28% for the other for virtual endoscopy, panoramic endoscopy, and axial CT, respectively. Three-dimensional displays were more sensitive than two-dimensional displays (P < .05).
CONCLUSION: The sensitivity of panoramic endoscopy is higher than that of virtual endoscopy, because the former displays more of the colonic surface. Higher sensitivities for three-dimensional displays may justify the additional computation and review time.
Index terms: Computed tomography (CT), image display and recording, 75.12115, 75.12117 • Computed tomography (CT), three-dimensional, 75.12117 • Computers, simulation • Colon, CT, 75.12111, 75.12115, 75.12117 • Colon, neoplasms, 75.3119
Related Article
Radiology 1999 212: 195-201.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P. J. Pickhardt, A. D. Lee, A. J. Taylor, S. J. Michel, T. C. Winter, A. Shadid, R. J. Meiners, P. J. Chase, J. L. Hinshaw, J. G. Williams, et al. Primary 2D Versus Primary 3D Polyp Detection at Screening CT Colonography Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2007; 189(6): 1451 - 1456. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. C. Silva, C. V. Wellnitz, and A. K. Hara Three-dimensional Virtual Dissection at CT Colonography: Unraveling the Colon to Search for Lesions RadioGraphics, November 1, 2006; 26(6): 1669 - 1686. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Macari and E. J. Bini CT Colonography: Where Have We Been and Where Are We Going? Radiology, December 1, 2005; 237(3): 819 - 833. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. A. Barish, J. A. Soto, and J. T. Ferrucci Consensus on Current Clinical Practice of Virtual Colonoscopy Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2005; 184(3): 786 - 792. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Hoppe, C. Quattropani, A. Spreng, J. Mattich, P. Netzer, and H.-P. Dinkel Virtual Colon Dissection with CT Colonography Compared with Axial Interpretation and Conventional Colonoscopy: Preliminary Results Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2004; 182(5): 1151 - 1158. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. H. Dachman and M. E. Zalis Quality and Consistency in CT Colonography and Research Reporting Radiology, February 1, 2004; 230(2): 319 - 323. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. Pickhardt Three-Dimensional Endoluminal CT Colonography (Virtual Colonoscopy): Comparison of Three Commercially Available Systems Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2003; 181(6): 1599 - 1606. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. M. Vos, R. E. van Gelder, I. W. O. Serlie, J. Florie, C. Y. Nio, A. S. Glas, F. H. Post, R. Truyen, F. A. Gerritsen, and J. Stoker Three-dimensional Display Modes for CT Colonography: Conventional 3D Virtual Colonoscopy versus Unfolded Cube Projection Radiology, September 1, 2003; 228(3): 878 - 885. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Yee, N. N. Kumar, R. K. Hung, G. A. Akerkar, P. R. G. Kumar, and S. D. Wall Comparison of Supine and Prone Scanning Separately and in Combination at CT Colonography Radiology, March 1, 2003; 226(3): 653 - 661. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. T. Ferrucci Colon Cancer Screening with Virtual Colonoscopy: Promise, Polyps, Politics Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2001; 177(5): 975 - 988. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. E. Zalis, P. F. Hahn, R. S. Arellano, G. S. Gazelle, and P. R. Mueller CT Colonography with Teleradiology: Effect of Lossy Wavelet Compression on Polyp Detection—Initial Observations Radiology, August 1, 2001; 220(2): 387 - 392. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. G. McFarland, J. A. Brink, T. K. Pilgram, J. P. Heiken, D. M. Balfe, D. A. Hirselj, L. Weinstock, and B. Littenberg Spiral CT Colonography: Reader Agreement and Diagnostic Performance with Two- and Three-dimensional Image-Display Techniques Radiology, February 1, 2001; 218(2): 375 - 383. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. R. Whiting, E. G. McFarland, and J. A. Brink Influence of Image Acquisition Parameters on CT Artifacts and Polyp Depiction in Spiral CT Colonography: In Vitro Evaluation Radiology, October 1, 2000; 217(1): 165 - 172. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. D. Johnson and A. H. Dachman CT Colonography: The Next Colon Screening Examination? Radiology, August 1, 2000; 216(2): 331 - 341. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. M. Summers, C. F. Beaulieu, L. M. Pusanik, J. D. Malley, R. B. Jeffrey Jr, D. I. Glazer, and S. Napel Automated Polyp Detector for CT Colonography: Feasibility Study Radiology, July 1, 2000; 216(1): 284 - 290. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Karadi, C. F. Beaulieu, R. B. Jeffrey Jr, D. S. Paik, and S. Napel Display Modes for CT Colonography: Part I. Synthesis and Insertion of Polyps into Patient CT Data Radiology, July 1, 1999; 212(1): 195 - 201. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |
