Van Gelder Rogier E, Nio C Yung, Florie Jasper, Bartelsman Joep F, Snel Pleun, De Jager Steven W, Van Deventer Sander J, Laméris Johan S, Bossuyt Patrick M M, Stoker Jaap
Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center of the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Gastroenterology. 2004 Jul;127(1):41-8. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2004.03.055.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: To date, computed tomographic (CT) colonography has been compared with an imperfect test, colonoscopy, and has been mainly assessed in patients with positive screening test results or symptoms. Therefore, the available data may not apply to screening of patients with a personal or family history of colorectal polyps or cancer (increased risk). We prospectively investigated the ability of CT colonography to identify individuals with large (>or=10 mm) colorectal polyps in consecutive patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer.
A total of 249 consecutive patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer underwent CT colonography before colonoscopy. Two reviewers interpreted CT colonography examinations independently. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were determined after meticulous matching of CT colonography with colonoscopy. Unexplained large false-positive findings were verified with a second-look colonoscopy.
In total, 31 patients (12%) had 48 large polyps at colonoscopy. This included 8 patients with 8 large polyps that were overlooked initially and detected at the second-look colonoscopy. In 6 of 8 patients, the missed polyp was the only large lesion. With CT colonography, 84% of patients (26/31) with large polyp(s) were identified, paired for a specificity of 92% (200-201/218). Positive and negative predictive values were 59%-60% (26/43-44) and 98% (200-201/205-206), respectively. CT colonography detected 75%-77% (36-37/48) of large polyps, with 9 of the missed lesions being flat.
CT colonography and colonoscopy have a similar ability to identify individuals with large polyps in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. The large proportion of missed flat lesions warrants further study.
迄今为止,计算机断层扫描(CT)结肠成像一直是与不完善的检查方法结肠镜检查相比较,并且主要是在筛查试验结果呈阳性或有症状的患者中进行评估。因此,现有数据可能不适用于对有大肠息肉或癌症个人史或家族史(风险增加)的患者进行筛查。我们前瞻性地研究了CT结肠成像在连续的患结直肠癌风险增加的患者中识别患有大的(≥10毫米)大肠息肉个体的能力。
总共249名连续的患结直肠癌风险增加的患者在结肠镜检查前接受了CT结肠成像检查。两名阅片者独立解读CT结肠成像检查结果。在将CT结肠成像与结肠镜检查进行细致匹配后确定敏感性、特异性和预测值。无法解释的大的假阳性结果通过再次结肠镜检查进行核实。
总共31名患者(12%)在结肠镜检查时发现有48个大息肉。这包括8名患者有8个大息肉最初被漏诊并在再次结肠镜检查时被发现。在8名患者中的6名中,漏诊的息肉是唯一的大病变。通过CT结肠成像,84%(26/31)患有大息肉的患者被识别出来,特异性为92%(200 - 201/218)。阳性和阴性预测值分别为59% - 60%(26/43 - 44)和98%(200 - 201/205 - 206)。CT结肠成像检测到75% - 77%(36 - 37/48)的大息肉,漏诊的病变中有9个是扁平的。
CT结肠成像和结肠镜检查在识别患结直肠癌风险增加的患者中的大息肉个体方面能力相似。大量漏诊的扁平病变值得进一步研究。