AIM:To compare the results from computed tomography (CT) colonography with conventional colonoscopy in symptomatic patients referred for colonoscopy. METHODS: The study included 227 adult outpatients, mean age 60 year...AIM:To compare the results from computed tomography (CT) colonography with conventional colonoscopy in symptomatic patients referred for colonoscopy. METHODS: The study included 227 adult outpatients, mean age 60 years, with appropriate indications for colonoscopy. CT colonography and colonoscopy were performed on the same day in a metropolitan teaching hospital. Colonoscopists were initially blinded to the results of CT colonography but there was segmental unblinding during the procedure. The primary outcome measures were the sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography for the identification of polyps seen at colonoscopy (i.e. analysis by polyp). Secondary outcome measures included an analysis by patient, extracolonic findings at CT colonography, adverse events with both procedures and patient acceptance and preference. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (11%) were excluded from the analysis because of incomplete colonoscopy or poor bowel preparation that affected either CT colonography, colonoscopy or both procedures. Polyps and masses (usually cancers) were detected at colonoscopy and CT colonography in 35% and 42% of patients, respectively. Of nine patients with a finaldiagnosis of cancer, eight (89%) were identified by CT colonography as masses (5) or polyps (3). For polyps analyzed according to polyp, the overall sensitivity of CT colonography was 50% (95% CI, 39%-61%) but this increased to 71% (95% CI, 52%-85%) for polyps ≥ 6 mm in size. Similarly, specificity for all polyps was 48% (95% CI, 39%-58%) increasing to 67% (95% CI, 56%-76%) for polyps ≥ 6 mm. Adverse events were uncommon but included one colonic perforation at colonoscopy. Patient acceptance was high for both procedures but preference favoured CT colonography. CONCLUSION: Although CT colonography was more sensitive in this study than in some previous studies, the procedure is not yet sensitive enough for widespread application in symptomatic patients.展开更多
Diagnosis of chronic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) is based on a combination of clinical symptoms, laboratory tests and imaging data. Imaging of the morphological characteristics of IBD includes the assessment of ...Diagnosis of chronic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) is based on a combination of clinical symptoms, laboratory tests and imaging data. Imaging of the morphological characteristics of IBD includes the assessment of mucosal alterations, transmural involvement and extraintestinal manifestations. No single imaging technique serves as a diagnostic gold standard to encompass all disease manifestations. Ultrasound, computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allow cross-sectional imaging of the transmural alterations and extraintestinal manifestations. While in the USA the technique of choice is CT, in Europe the focus is more on MRI and ultrasound (US). Most patients with chronic IBD are diagnosed at a young age. After baseline diagnosis many of these young patients have to undergo repetitive imaging procedures during the variable clinical course of the disease, characterized by alternate periods of remission and active disease, and in monitoring the response to treatment. US has the advantage of being noninvasive, less costly, and easily repeatable, and thus can be very useful in following up patients with IBD. In addition, rising concern about radiation exposure in young adults indicates the demand for radiation-sparing techniques like US and MRI. This article focuses on the current clinical practice of US in IBD, describing the current technologies used in transabdominal intestinal US and the characteristic sonographic findings in Crohn′s disease and ulcerative colitis.展开更多
文摘AIM:To compare the results from computed tomography (CT) colonography with conventional colonoscopy in symptomatic patients referred for colonoscopy. METHODS: The study included 227 adult outpatients, mean age 60 years, with appropriate indications for colonoscopy. CT colonography and colonoscopy were performed on the same day in a metropolitan teaching hospital. Colonoscopists were initially blinded to the results of CT colonography but there was segmental unblinding during the procedure. The primary outcome measures were the sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography for the identification of polyps seen at colonoscopy (i.e. analysis by polyp). Secondary outcome measures included an analysis by patient, extracolonic findings at CT colonography, adverse events with both procedures and patient acceptance and preference. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (11%) were excluded from the analysis because of incomplete colonoscopy or poor bowel preparation that affected either CT colonography, colonoscopy or both procedures. Polyps and masses (usually cancers) were detected at colonoscopy and CT colonography in 35% and 42% of patients, respectively. Of nine patients with a finaldiagnosis of cancer, eight (89%) were identified by CT colonography as masses (5) or polyps (3). For polyps analyzed according to polyp, the overall sensitivity of CT colonography was 50% (95% CI, 39%-61%) but this increased to 71% (95% CI, 52%-85%) for polyps ≥ 6 mm in size. Similarly, specificity for all polyps was 48% (95% CI, 39%-58%) increasing to 67% (95% CI, 56%-76%) for polyps ≥ 6 mm. Adverse events were uncommon but included one colonic perforation at colonoscopy. Patient acceptance was high for both procedures but preference favoured CT colonography. CONCLUSION: Although CT colonography was more sensitive in this study than in some previous studies, the procedure is not yet sensitive enough for widespread application in symptomatic patients.
文摘Diagnosis of chronic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) is based on a combination of clinical symptoms, laboratory tests and imaging data. Imaging of the morphological characteristics of IBD includes the assessment of mucosal alterations, transmural involvement and extraintestinal manifestations. No single imaging technique serves as a diagnostic gold standard to encompass all disease manifestations. Ultrasound, computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allow cross-sectional imaging of the transmural alterations and extraintestinal manifestations. While in the USA the technique of choice is CT, in Europe the focus is more on MRI and ultrasound (US). Most patients with chronic IBD are diagnosed at a young age. After baseline diagnosis many of these young patients have to undergo repetitive imaging procedures during the variable clinical course of the disease, characterized by alternate periods of remission and active disease, and in monitoring the response to treatment. US has the advantage of being noninvasive, less costly, and easily repeatable, and thus can be very useful in following up patients with IBD. In addition, rising concern about radiation exposure in young adults indicates the demand for radiation-sparing techniques like US and MRI. This article focuses on the current clinical practice of US in IBD, describing the current technologies used in transabdominal intestinal US and the characteristic sonographic findings in Crohn′s disease and ulcerative colitis.
