Colorectal cancer is the second most frequent cancer and adenomas are widely accepted as precursors to colorectal cancer. Diagnosis and removal of adenomas are recommended to reduce cancer incidence and mortality. The current diagnostic methods include sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. Lately, CT- and MR colonography have emerged as non-invasive methods for colon imaging.
Methods:
At present, CTC and MRC require bowel preparation. However, preliminary studies have been carried out without colon preparation. After the colon has been filled with air or contrast, the patient is scanned in the supine and prone positions. Data are then downloaded to a workstation for post processing and image-analysis.
Results:
Results have shown a high sensitivity and specificity for polyps ≥ 10 mm, comparable to the sensitivity of conventional colonoscopy and superior to double contrast barium enema.
Conclusions:
With the exponential development in computer processing power, CT- and MR colonography holds the promise for future colon examination with the advantages of non-invasiveness, no need for sedation, and probably no bowel preparation. major disadvantage, however, is the radiation dose during CT colonography. Future developments with the use of “intelligent” computers, better resolution and faster examinations will make CT and/or MR colonography realistic options to replace conventional diagnostic colonoscopy.
EddyDMScreening for colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med1990;113:373–384.
2.
American Cancer Society: Cancer facts and figures, 1998. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society1998.
3.
MandelJSBondJHChurchTRSnoverDCBradleyGMSchumanLMEdererFReducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for faecal occult blood. N Engl J Med1993;328:1365–1371.
4.
KronborgOFengerCOlsenJJørgensenODSøndergaardORandomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet1996;348:1467–1471.
5.
HardcastleJDChamberlainJORobinsonMHMossSMAmarSSBalfourTWJamesPDManghamCMRandomised controlled trial of faecal occult-blood testing for colorectal cancer. Lancet1996;348:1472–1477.
6.
EideTJNatural history of adenomas. World J Surg1991;15:3–6.
7.
KronborgOFengerCClinical evidence for the adenoma-carcinoma sequence. Eur J Cancer Prevention1999; 8 Suppl1: S73–S86.
8.
GedebouTMWongRARappaportWDJaffePKahsaiDHunterGCClinical presentation and management of iatrogenic colon perforations. Am J Surg1996;172:454–458.
9.
Statens Institut for Medicinsk Teknologivurdering: Kræft i tyktarm og endetarm. Diagnostik og screening. Medicinsk teknologivurdering2001; 3 (1).
10.
ViningDJGelfandDWBechtoldREScharlingESGrishawEKShifrinRYTechnical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality. Am J Roentgenol1994;162:104.
11.
TaylorPNBecklyDEUse of air in double-contrast barium enema: Is it still acceptable? Clin Radiol1991;44:183–184.
12.
McFarlandEGBrinkJAHelical CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): The challenge that exists between advancing technology and generalizability. Am J Roentgenol1999;173:549–559.
13.
FenlonHMFerrucciJTVirtual colonoscopy: What will the issues be? Am J Roentgenol1997;169:453–469.
14.
YeeJHungRKAkerkarGAWallSDThe usefulness of glucagon hydrochloride for colonic distention in CT colonography. Am J Roentgenol1999;173:169–173.
15.
HaraAKJohnsonCDReedJEAhlquistDANelsonHEhmanRLMcCollougCHIlstrupDMDetection of colorectal polyps by computed tomographic colography: Feasibility of a novel technique. Gastroenterology1996;110:284–290.
LuboldtWSteinerPBauerfeindPPelkonenPDebatinJFDetection of mass lesions with MR colonography: Preliminary report. Radiology1998;207:59–65.
22.
YoshidaHMasutaniYMacEneaneyPRubinDTDachmanAHComputerized detection of colonic polyps at CT colonography on the basis of volumetric features: Pilot study. Radiology2002;222:327–336.
23.
MorinMMHochmanMGFarellRJMarquesuzaaHRosenbergSEdelmanREMR colonography using colonic distention with air as contrast matarial: Work in progress. Am J Roentgenol2001;176:144–146.
24.
HagspielKDAltesTAMuglerJPSpellmanMJMataJFTustisonNJBrookemanJRMR virtual colonography using hyperpolarized 3He as endoluminal contrast agent: Demonstration of feasibility. Magn Reson Med2000;44:813–816.
25.
GopalswamyNShenoyVNChoudhryUMarkertRJPeaceNBhutaniMSBardeCJIs in vivo maesurement of size of polyps during colonoscopy accurate? Gastrointest Endosc1997;46:497–502.
26.
PappalardoGPolettiniEFrattaroliFMCascianiED'ortaCD'amatoMGualdiGFMagnetic resonance colonography versus coventional colonoscopy for the detection of colonic endoluminal lesions. Gastroenterology2000;119:300–304.
27.
RoysterAPFenlonHMClarkePDNunesDPFerrucciJTCT colonoscopy of colorectal neoplasms: Two-dimensional and three-dimensional virtual-reality techniques with colonoscopic correlation. Am J Roentgenol1997;169:1237–1242.
28.
FenlonHMNunesDPClarkePDFerrucciJTColorectal neoplasm detection using virtual colonoscopy: A feasibility study. Gut1998;43:806–811.
29.
The Third International Symposium on Virtual Colonoscopy, Boston, MA, 8–10 April2002.
30.
MorrinMMFarellRJRaptopoulosVMcGeeJBBledayRKruskalJBRole of virtual computed tomography in patients with colorectal cancers and obstructing colorectal lesions. Dis Colon Rectum2000;43:303–311.
31.
FenlonHMMcAnenyDBNunesDPClarkePDFerrucciJTOcclusive colon carcinoma: Virtual colonoscopy in the preoperative evaluation of the proximal colon. Radiology1999;210:423–428.
32.
BatLNeumannGShemeshEThe association of synchronous neoplasms with occluding colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum1985;28:149–151.
33.
DixonAKDendyPSpiral CT: How much does radiation dose matter? Lancet1998;352:1082–1083.
34.
HaraAKJohnsonCDReedJEAhlquistDANelsonHMacCartyRLHarmsenWSIlstrupDMDetection of colorectal polyps with CT colography: Initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity. Radiology1997;205:59–65.
35.
FenlonHMNunesDPSchroyPCBarishMAClarkePDFerrucciJTA comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med1999;341:1496–1503.
36.
LuboldtWDebatinJFVirtual endoscopic colonography based on 3D MRI. Abdom Imaging1998;23:568–572.
37.
DachmanAHKuniyoshiJKBoyleCMSamaraYHoffmannKRRubinDTHananICT colonogaphy with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps. Am J Roentgenol1998;171:989–995.
38.
RexDKViningDKopeckyKAn initial experience with screening for colon polyps using spiral CT with and without CT virtual colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc1999;50:309–313.
39.
LuboldtWBauerfeindPWildermuthSMarincekBFriedMDebatinJFColonic masses: Detection with MR colonography. Radiology2000;216:383–388.
40.
KayCLKullingDHawesRHYoungJWRCottonPBVirtual endoscopy — Comparison with colonoscopy in detection of space-occupying lesions of the colon. Endoscopy2000;32:226–232.
41.
FletcherJGJohnsonCDWelschTJMacCartyRLAhlquistDAReedJEHarmsenWSWilsonLAOptimization of CT colonography technique: Prospective trial in 180 patients. Radiology2000;216:704–711.
42.
SaarBHerverhagenJTObstTBertholdLDKoppIKloseKJWagnerHJMagnetic resonance colonography and virtual magnetic resonance colonoscopy with the 1.0-T system. Invest Radiol2000; 35: 521–526.
43.
LuboldtWLuzOVontheinRHeuschmidMSeemannMSchaeferJStuekerDClaussenCDThree-dimensional double-contrast MR colonography: A display method simulating double-contrast barium enema. Am J Roentgenol2001;176:930–932.
44.
LaghiAIannacconeRCarboneICatalanoCDi GiulioESchillaciAPassarielloRDetection of colorectal lesions with virtual computed tomographic colonography. Am J Jurg2002; 183: 124–131.
45.
LaghiAIannacconeRCarboneICatalanoCPanebiancoVDi GiulioESchillaciAPassarielloRComputed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): Blinded prospective comparison with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasia. Endoscopy2002;34:441–446.
