Taylor S A, Halligan S, Slater A, Marshall M, Bartram C I
Department of Intestinal Imaging, St Mark's and Northwick Park Hospitals, Harrow, London HA1 3UJ, UK.
Br J Radiol. 2006 Mar;79(939):208-15. doi: 10.1259/bjr/99126323.
The aim of this study was to compare the confidence of experienced radiologists in excluding colonic neoplasia with CT colonography (CTC) compared with barium enema. 78 patients (median age 70 years, range 61-87 years, 44 women) underwent same day CTC and barium enema. Two radiologists experienced in reporting barium enema assessed whether the examination had excluded a polyp 6 mm or greater as "yes", "probably" or "no" for each of 6 colonic segments. Two different radiologists experienced in CTC independently performed the same assessment on the CT datasets. Responses were compared using a paired exact test. Formal barium enema and CT reports were compared with any endoscopic examination performed within 1 year. Studies reporting polyps 6 mm+ in patients not subsequently undergoing endoscopy were reviewed by two independent observers. Radiologists stated they had confidently excluded a significant lesion in 314 (71%) and 382 (86%) of 444 segments with barium enema and CTC, respectively (p<0.001). Confidence was significantly higher with CTC in the in the descending and ascending colon (p = 0.02 and p<0.001, respectively), and caecum (p<0.001). 22 patients underwent some form of endoscopy. Of five patients with proven colorectal neoplasia (including two with cancer), CTC and barium enema correctly identified five and three, respectively. In 56 patients not undergoing endoscopy, CTC reported 17 polyps 6 mm+, of which 16 were retrospectively classified as definite or probable. 11 could not be identified on the barium enema, even in retrospect. Confidence in excluding polyps 6 mm or larger is significantly greater with CT colonography particularly in the proximal colon.
本研究的目的是比较经验丰富的放射科医生在使用CT结肠成像(CTC)与钡剂灌肠排除结肠肿瘤方面的信心。78例患者(年龄中位数70岁,范围61 - 87岁,44例女性)在同一天接受了CTC和钡剂灌肠检查。两名有钡剂灌肠报告经验的放射科医生针对6个结肠段中的每一段,评估检查是否排除了6毫米及以上的息肉,结果分为“是”“可能”或“否”。两名有CTC经验的不同放射科医生对CT数据集独立进行相同评估。使用配对精确检验比较结果。将正式的钡剂灌肠和CT报告与1年内进行的任何内镜检查结果进行比较。两名独立观察者对未随后接受内镜检查的患者中报告有6毫米及以上息肉的研究进行了审查。放射科医生表示,在444个结肠段中,他们分别在314个(71%)和382个(86%)结肠段中通过钡剂灌肠和CTC自信地排除了重大病变(p<0.001)。在降结肠(p = 0.02)、升结肠(p<0.001)和盲肠(p<0.001)中,CTC的信心明显更高。22例患者接受了某种形式的内镜检查。在5例经证实患有结直肠肿瘤的患者(包括2例癌症患者)中,CTC和钡剂灌肠分别正确识别出5例和3例。在56例未接受内镜检查的患者中,CTC报告了17个6毫米及以上的息肉,其中16个经回顾性分类为确定或可能。即使在回顾时,钡剂灌肠也无法识别其中11个息肉。使用CT结肠成像排除6毫米或更大息肉的信心明显更高,尤其是在近端结肠。