Vos Frans M, van Gelder Rogier E, Serlie Iwo W O, Florie Jasper, Nio C Yung, Glas Afina S, Post Frits H, Truyen Roel, Gerritsen Frans A, Stoker Jaap
Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Radiology. 2003 Sep;228(3):878-85. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2283020846.
The authors compared a conventional two-directional three-dimensional (3D) display for computed tomography (CT) colonography with an alternative method they developed on the basis of time efficiency and surface visibility. With the conventional technique, 3D ante- and retrograde cine loops were obtained (hereafter, conventional 3D). With the alternative method, six projections were obtained at 90 degrees viewing angles (unfolded cube display). Mean evaluation time per patient with the conventional 3D display was significantly longer than that with the unfolded cube display. With the conventional 3D method, 93.8% of the colon surface came into view; with the unfolded cube method, 99.5% of the colon surface came into view. Sensitivity and specificity were not significantly different between the two methods. Agreements between observers were kappa = 0.605 for conventional 3D display and kappa = 0.692 for unfolded cube display. Consequently, the latter method enhances the 3D endoluminal display with improved time efficiency and higher surface visibility.
