CT colonography: avoiding traps and pitfalls

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a reliable technique for detecting tumoral lesions in the colon. However, good performance of polyp detection is only achieved if experienced CTC radiologists combine meticulous interpretation with state-of-the-art CTC technique. To reach this experience level, CTC training is mandatory. With a considerably long and steep learning curve, it has been demonstrated that in inexperienced hands both technical failure and observer errors stand for the majority of missed lesions. The purpose of this pictorial review is to give an overview of traps and pitfalls in CTC imaging resulting in false negative and positive findings, and how to avoid them by application of state-of-the-art CTC technique and interpretation

Comparison of the diagnostic performance of CT colonography interpreted by radiologists and radiographers

OBJECTIVE: To compare computed tomographic colonography (CTC) performance of four trained radiographers with the CTC performance of two experienced radiologists. METHODS: Four radiographers and two radiologists interpreted 87 cases with 40 polyps ≥6 mm. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) were assessed on a per-patient basis. On a per-polyp basis, sensitivity was calculated according to the respective size categories (polyps ≥6 mm as well as polyps ≥10 mm). RESULTS: Overall per-patient sensitivity for polyps ≥6 mm was 76.2 % (95 % CI 61.4–91.0) and 76.2 % (95 % CI 61.7–90.6), for the radiographers and radiologists, respectively. Overall per-patient specificity for polyps ≥6 mm were 81.4 % (95 % CI 73.7–89.2) and 81.1 % (95 % CI 73.8–88.3) for the radiographers and the radiologists, respectively. For the radiographers, overall per-polyp sensitivity was 60.3 % (95 % CI 50.3–70.3) and 60.7 % (95 % CI 42.2–79.2) for polyps ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm, respectively. For the radiologists, overall per polyp sensitivity was 59.2 % (95 % CI 46.4–72.0) and 69.0 % (95 % CI 48.1–89.6) for polyps ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: Radiographers with training in CT colonographic evaluation achieved sensitivity and specificity in polyp detection comparable with that of experienced radiologists. MAIN MESSAGES: • The diagnostic accuracy of trained radiographers was comparable to that of experienced radiologists. • The use of radiographers in reading CTC examinations is acceptable, however radiologists would still be necessary for the evaluation of extracolonic findings. • Skilled non-radiologists may play a vital role as a second reader of intraluminal findings or by performing quality control of examinations before patient dismissal

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

CT colonography polyp matching: differences between experienced readers

The purpose of this study was to investigate if experienced readers differ when matching polyps shown by both CT colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) and to explore the reasons for discrepancy. Twenty-eight CTC cases with corresponding OC were presented to eight experienced CTC readers. Cases represented a broad spectrum of findings, not completely fulfilling typical matching criteria. In 21 cases there was a single polyp on CTC and OC; in seven there were multiple polyps. Agreement between readers for matching was analyzed. For the 21 single-polyp cases, the number of correct matches per reader varied from 13 to 19. Almost complete agreement between readers was observed in 15 cases (71%), but substantial discrepancy was found for the remaining six (29%) probably due to large perceived differences in polyp size between CT and OC. Readers were able to match between 27 (71%) and 35 (92%) of the 38 CTC detected polyps in the seven cases with multiple polyps. Experienced CTC readers agree to a considerable extent when matching polyps between CTC and subsequent OC, but non-negligible disagreement exist

Serum 25(OH)D level on hospital admission associated with COVID-19 stage and mortality

Objectives: Vitamin D deficiency was previously correlated with incidence and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We investigated the association between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) level on admission and radiologic stage and outcome of COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: A retrospective observational trial was done on 186 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-infected individuals hospitalized from March 1, 2020, to April 7, 2020, with combined chest computed tomography (CT) and 25(OH)D measurement on admission. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to study if vitamin D deficiency (25(OH)D <20 ng/mL) correlates with survival independently of confounding comorbidities. Results: Of the patients with COVID-19, 59% were vitamin D deficient on admission: 47% of females and 67% of males. In particular, male patients with COVID-19 showed progressively lower 25(OH)D with advancing radiologic stage, with deficiency rates increasing from 55% in stage I to 74% in stage 3. Vitamin D deficiency on admission was not confounded by age, ethnicity, chronic lung disease, coronary artery diseasel hypertension, or diabetes and was associated with mortality (odds ratio [OR], 3.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-11.55), independent of age (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03-1.14), chronic lung disease (OR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.18-11.09), and extent of lung damage expressed by chest CT severity score (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01-1.25). Conclusions: Low 25(OH)D levels on admission are associated with COVID-19 disease stage and mortality