Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Eur Radiol. 2010 Aug;20(8):1905-16. doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-1765-z. Epub 2010 Mar 23.
To compare the performance of computer-aided detection (CAD) for CT colonography (CTC) with and without electronic cleansing (EC) in a high-risk population tagged with a faecal tagging (FT) protocol.
Thirty-two patients underwent CTC followed by same-day colonoscopy. All patients underwent bowel preparation and FT with barium and gastrografin. Each CTC dataset was processed with colon CAD with and without EC. Per-polyp sensitivity was calculated. The average number of false-positive (FP) results and their causes were also analysed and compared.
Eighty-six polyps were detected in 29 patients. Per-polyp sensitivities of CAD with EC (93.8% and 100%) were higher than those without EC (84.4% and 87.5%) for polyps >or=6 mm and >or=10 mm, respectively. However, the differences were not significant. The average number (6.3) of FPs of CAD with EC was significantly larger than that (3.1) without EC. The distribution of FPs in both CAD settings was also significantly different. The most common cause of FPs was the ileocaecal valve in both datasets. However, untagged faeces was a significantly less common cause of FPs with EC, EC-related artefacts being more common.
Electronic cleansing has the potential to improve per-polyp sensitivity of CTC CAD, although the significantly larger number of FPs with EC remains to be improved.
比较 CT 结肠成像(CTC)中带粪便标记(FT)协议的高危人群中带和不带电子清洁(EC)的计算机辅助检测(CAD)的性能。
32 名患者接受 CTC 检查,随后当天行结肠镜检查。所有患者均接受肠道准备和 FT 钡剂和胃造影剂。每个 CTC 数据集均采用带和不带 EC 的结肠 CAD 进行处理。计算每息肉的敏感性。还分析和比较了平均假阳性(FP)结果及其原因。
29 名患者中发现 86 个息肉。EC 辅助 CAD 的息肉>或=6mm 和>或=10mm 的每息肉敏感性(93.8%和 100%)高于无 EC 辅助 CAD 的敏感性(84.4%和 87.5%)。然而,差异并不显著。EC 辅助 CAD 的平均 FP 数量(6.3)明显大于无 EC 辅助 CAD(3.1)。两种 CAD 设置中的 FP 分布也有显著差异。FT 是两种数据集 FP 最常见的原因。然而,EC 中未标记的粪便引起 FP 的可能性明显较小,EC 相关伪影更常见。
电子清洁有可能提高 CTC CAD 的每息肉敏感性,尽管 EC 引起的 FP 数量明显更多,仍有待改进。