Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography

Judy Yee, Naveen N. Kumar, Raymond K. Hung, Geetanjali A. Akerkar, Prasanna R.G. Kumar, Susan D. Wall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

115 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare colonic distention, adequacy of colonic preparation, and colorectal polyp detection as assessed with supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at computed tomographic (CT) colonography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT colonography and colonoscopy were performed in 182 patients. Distention and preparation of eight colonic segments were rated separately on a scale of 1-4 (1, segment completely distended or no residual material; 4, segment collapsed or large amounts of residual material). The distention, preparation, and polyp detection data were compared with regard to each position alone and then in combination. CT findings were correlated with colonoscopic findings. RESULTS: The percentage of colonic segments with grade 1 distention and preparation was 93.7% (1,364 of 1,456) and 66.6% (969 of 1,456), respectively, with combined scanning; 86.4% (1,258 of 1,456) and 52.1% (759 of 1,456), respectively, with supine scanning alone; and 85.6% (1,246 of 1,456) and 57.1% (831 of 1,456), respectively, with prone scanning alone. The sensitivity for detection of colorectal polyps 10 mm or larger, 5.0-9.9 mm, and smaller than 5 mm and polyps of all sizes was 92.7%, 79.8%, 60.3%, and 69.9%, respectively, with combined scanning. Sensitivity was 58.5%, 47.2%, 36.3%, and 42.1%, respectively, with supine scanning and 51.2%, 41.6%, 30.2%, and 36.3%, respectively, with prone scanning. The improved sensitivities for use of combined versus individual scanning positions were highly significant (P < .001) for polyps in all size categories. CONCLUSION: Colonic distention and preparation at CT colonography were significantly improved by using supine and prone scanning in combination, and results correlated directly with improved sensitivity of polyp detection.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)653-661
Number of pages9
JournalRadiology
Volume226
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Computed Tomographic Colonography
Polyps
Colonoscopy

Keywords

  • Colon neoplasms
  • Colon, CT
  • Colonoscopy
  • Computed tomography (CT), image processing
  • Computed tomography (CT), three-dimensional

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Yee, J., Kumar, N. N., Hung, R. K., Akerkar, G. A., Kumar, P. R. G., & Wall, S. D. (2003). Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography. Radiology, 226(3), 653-661. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2263010701

Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography. / Yee, Judy; Kumar, Naveen N.; Hung, Raymond K.; Akerkar, Geetanjali A.; Kumar, Prasanna R.G.; Wall, Susan D.

In: Radiology, Vol. 226, No. 3, 01.03.2003, p. 653-661.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Yee, J, Kumar, NN, Hung, RK, Akerkar, GA, Kumar, PRG & Wall, SD 2003, 'Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography', Radiology, vol. 226, no. 3, pp. 653-661. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2263010701
Yee, Judy ; Kumar, Naveen N. ; Hung, Raymond K. ; Akerkar, Geetanjali A. ; Kumar, Prasanna R.G. ; Wall, Susan D. / Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography. In: Radiology. 2003 ; Vol. 226, No. 3. pp. 653-661.
@article{a62c5cf0970d46a484bee6f5c632baff,
title = "Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To compare colonic distention, adequacy of colonic preparation, and colorectal polyp detection as assessed with supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at computed tomographic (CT) colonography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT colonography and colonoscopy were performed in 182 patients. Distention and preparation of eight colonic segments were rated separately on a scale of 1-4 (1, segment completely distended or no residual material; 4, segment collapsed or large amounts of residual material). The distention, preparation, and polyp detection data were compared with regard to each position alone and then in combination. CT findings were correlated with colonoscopic findings. RESULTS: The percentage of colonic segments with grade 1 distention and preparation was 93.7{\%} (1,364 of 1,456) and 66.6{\%} (969 of 1,456), respectively, with combined scanning; 86.4{\%} (1,258 of 1,456) and 52.1{\%} (759 of 1,456), respectively, with supine scanning alone; and 85.6{\%} (1,246 of 1,456) and 57.1{\%} (831 of 1,456), respectively, with prone scanning alone. The sensitivity for detection of colorectal polyps 10 mm or larger, 5.0-9.9 mm, and smaller than 5 mm and polyps of all sizes was 92.7{\%}, 79.8{\%}, 60.3{\%}, and 69.9{\%}, respectively, with combined scanning. Sensitivity was 58.5{\%}, 47.2{\%}, 36.3{\%}, and 42.1{\%}, respectively, with supine scanning and 51.2{\%}, 41.6{\%}, 30.2{\%}, and 36.3{\%}, respectively, with prone scanning. The improved sensitivities for use of combined versus individual scanning positions were highly significant (P < .001) for polyps in all size categories. CONCLUSION: Colonic distention and preparation at CT colonography were significantly improved by using supine and prone scanning in combination, and results correlated directly with improved sensitivity of polyp detection.",
keywords = "Colon neoplasms, Colon, CT, Colonoscopy, Computed tomography (CT), image processing, Computed tomography (CT), three-dimensional",
author = "Judy Yee and Kumar, {Naveen N.} and Hung, {Raymond K.} and Akerkar, {Geetanjali A.} and Kumar, {Prasanna R.G.} and Wall, {Susan D.}",
year = "2003",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1148/radiol.2263010701",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "226",
pages = "653--661",
journal = "Radiology",
issn = "0033-8419",
publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography

AU - Yee, Judy

AU - Kumar, Naveen N.

AU - Hung, Raymond K.

AU - Akerkar, Geetanjali A.

AU - Kumar, Prasanna R.G.

AU - Wall, Susan D.

PY - 2003/3/1

Y1 - 2003/3/1

N2 - PURPOSE: To compare colonic distention, adequacy of colonic preparation, and colorectal polyp detection as assessed with supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at computed tomographic (CT) colonography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT colonography and colonoscopy were performed in 182 patients. Distention and preparation of eight colonic segments were rated separately on a scale of 1-4 (1, segment completely distended or no residual material; 4, segment collapsed or large amounts of residual material). The distention, preparation, and polyp detection data were compared with regard to each position alone and then in combination. CT findings were correlated with colonoscopic findings. RESULTS: The percentage of colonic segments with grade 1 distention and preparation was 93.7% (1,364 of 1,456) and 66.6% (969 of 1,456), respectively, with combined scanning; 86.4% (1,258 of 1,456) and 52.1% (759 of 1,456), respectively, with supine scanning alone; and 85.6% (1,246 of 1,456) and 57.1% (831 of 1,456), respectively, with prone scanning alone. The sensitivity for detection of colorectal polyps 10 mm or larger, 5.0-9.9 mm, and smaller than 5 mm and polyps of all sizes was 92.7%, 79.8%, 60.3%, and 69.9%, respectively, with combined scanning. Sensitivity was 58.5%, 47.2%, 36.3%, and 42.1%, respectively, with supine scanning and 51.2%, 41.6%, 30.2%, and 36.3%, respectively, with prone scanning. The improved sensitivities for use of combined versus individual scanning positions were highly significant (P < .001) for polyps in all size categories. CONCLUSION: Colonic distention and preparation at CT colonography were significantly improved by using supine and prone scanning in combination, and results correlated directly with improved sensitivity of polyp detection.

AB - PURPOSE: To compare colonic distention, adequacy of colonic preparation, and colorectal polyp detection as assessed with supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at computed tomographic (CT) colonography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT colonography and colonoscopy were performed in 182 patients. Distention and preparation of eight colonic segments were rated separately on a scale of 1-4 (1, segment completely distended or no residual material; 4, segment collapsed or large amounts of residual material). The distention, preparation, and polyp detection data were compared with regard to each position alone and then in combination. CT findings were correlated with colonoscopic findings. RESULTS: The percentage of colonic segments with grade 1 distention and preparation was 93.7% (1,364 of 1,456) and 66.6% (969 of 1,456), respectively, with combined scanning; 86.4% (1,258 of 1,456) and 52.1% (759 of 1,456), respectively, with supine scanning alone; and 85.6% (1,246 of 1,456) and 57.1% (831 of 1,456), respectively, with prone scanning alone. The sensitivity for detection of colorectal polyps 10 mm or larger, 5.0-9.9 mm, and smaller than 5 mm and polyps of all sizes was 92.7%, 79.8%, 60.3%, and 69.9%, respectively, with combined scanning. Sensitivity was 58.5%, 47.2%, 36.3%, and 42.1%, respectively, with supine scanning and 51.2%, 41.6%, 30.2%, and 36.3%, respectively, with prone scanning. The improved sensitivities for use of combined versus individual scanning positions were highly significant (P < .001) for polyps in all size categories. CONCLUSION: Colonic distention and preparation at CT colonography were significantly improved by using supine and prone scanning in combination, and results correlated directly with improved sensitivity of polyp detection.

KW - Colon neoplasms

KW - Colon, CT

KW - Colonoscopy

KW - Computed tomography (CT), image processing

KW - Computed tomography (CT), three-dimensional

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037371529&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037371529&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1148/radiol.2263010701

DO - 10.1148/radiol.2263010701

M3 - Article

C2 - 12601201

AN - SCOPUS:0037371529

VL - 226

SP - 653

EP - 661

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 3

ER -