ライフサイエンスコーパス: colonography

1 T colonography for all except 6-mm CRC at CT colonography).

2 during colonic insufflation required for CT colonography.

3 pared with placebo in patients undergoing CT colonography.

4 formed in patients scheduled for elective CT colonography.

5 in 131 lesions on colonoscopy after final CT colonography.

6 abdominal radiologists with expertise in CT colonography.

7 e basis of longitudinal computed tomographic colonography.

8 ective expert localization of polyps with CT colonography.

9 creening for colorectal cancer with FS or CT colonography.

10 te provided excellent colon cleansing for CT colonography.

11 ine endorses the use of computed tomographic colonography.

12 tandardization, and (7) implementation of CT colonography.

13 nding issues related to computed tomographic colonography.

14 wer tests, such as computed tomographic (CT) colonography.

15 tual navigation and polyp registration at CT colonography.

16 patients had cardiac events subsequent to CT colonography.

17 , 59.2 years) with 338 polyps detected at CT colonography.

18 ly improved with tagging preparations for CT colonography.

19 in readers' estimations of polyp size at CT colonography.

20 st, current, and potential future role of CT colonography.

21 her any important findings were missed at CT colonography.

22 with FS and 298 of 980 (30.4%) underwent CT colonography.

23 ge, 57 years +/- 8; 5200 women) underwent CT colonography.

24 dergoing screening computed tomographic (CT) colonography.

25 all potential carpet lesions detected at CT colonography.

26 , location, and morphologic appearance at CT colonography), 181 (10%) were not confirmed with initial

27 ives were invited to undergo noncathartic CT colonography (200 mL of diatrizoate meglumine and diatri

28 een 1995 and 1998, 480 patients underwent CT colonography; 467 patients were available for assessment

29 utcomes included total pain and burden of CT colonography (5-point scale), the most burdensome aspect

30 uring CT colonography and may improve the CT colonography acceptance, especially for patients with a

31 Prospective studies of adults undergoing CT colonography after full bowel preparation, with colonosc

32 s (507 men, 475 women) underwent low-dose CT colonography after noncathartic bowel preparation (iodin

33 .03) and were more willing to undergo PET/CT colonography again (36/43 [84%; 95% CI, 73%-95%] vs. 31/

34 stration by using an algorithm at initial CT colonography allowed prediction of endoluminal polyp loc

35 r the past decade, computed tomographic (CT) colonography (also known as virtual colonoscopy) has bee

36 Computed tomographic (CT) colonography, also called virtual colonoscopy, is an evo

37 Computed tomographic (CT) colonography, also known as virtual colonoscopy or CT co

38 e identified as diminutive at the initial CT colonography and 12.6% (26 of 207) were missed.

39 All participants underwent CT colonography and colonoscopy on the same day.

40 Matching between findings from CT colonography and colonoscopy was allowed when lesions we

41 l discomfort was canvassed after both PET/CT colonography and colonoscopy.

42 The diagnostic performance for standalone CT colonography and combined PET/CT colonography was compar

43 nge, 43-92 years), each of whom underwent CT colonography and DXA within a 6-month period (between Ja

44 of rectal cancer, as well as the place of CT colonography and fecal tests in post-CRC surveillance.

45 e acceptability of computed tomographic (CT) colonography and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening a

46 Conclusion CT colonography and FS screening are well accepted, but fur

47 relevant reduction of maximum pain during CT colonography and may improve the CT colonography accepta

48 with oral contrast agents, and subsequent CT colonography and segmentally unblinded colonoscopy.

49 Findings at CT colonography and subsequent colonoscopy were recorded, a

50 , patients who had insurance coverage for CT colonography and were due for CRC screening had a 48% gr

51 ded 63 consecutive patients who underwent CT colonography and who waived informed consent.

52 n the cohort undergoing colonoscopy after CT colonography and/or surgery (there were no false-negativ

53 polyp location automatically at follow-up CT colonography) and the consistency method (polyp coordina

54 rast barium enema, computed tomographic (CT) colonography, and magnetic resonance (MR) colonography-f

55 A radiologist, experienced in CT colonography, and nuclear medicine physician in consensu

56 ns of contrast material, scanned by using CT colonography, and subjected to electronic subtraction cl

57 interpretations at computed tomographic (CT) colonography are due to observer error.

58 Aortic calcification scores at CT colonography are significantly associated with establish

59 , the barium enema has been supplanted by CT colonography as the major imaging test in colorectal can

60 assess the behaviour of such polyps with CT colonography assessments.

61 CT colonography at 5- and 10-year screening intervals and c

62 CT colonography at 5- and 10-year screening intervals was m

63 152 consecutive adults undergoing initial CT colonography at a tertiary center were reviewed in this

64 50 seniors: mean age, 69 years) underwent CT colonography at an outpatient facility.

65 ean age, 59.8 years) undergoing screening CT colonography at two centers in this institutional review

66 routine colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography at two medical centres in the USA.

67 (90.6%) FS attendees, 237 of 298 (79.5%) CT colonography attendees, and 182 of 299 (60.9%) CT colono

68 atives was 99.1% among FS and 93.3% among CT colonography attendees.

69 nts were enrolled in a single-institution CT colonography-based screening program (from 2004 to 2011)

70 Conclusion Serrated lesions are seen at CT colonography-based screening with a nondiminutive preval

71 e serrated lesions (>/=6 mm) were seen at CT colonography-based screening with a prevalence of 3.1% (

72 ice, polyps prospectively identified with CT colonography but not confirmed with subsequent nonblinde

73 g 373 patients with a positive finding at CT colonography, CAD marked an additional 15 polyps of 6 mm

74 These issues must be resolved before CT colonography can be advocated for generalized screening

75 CT colonography can effectively depict carpet lesions.

76 n (CAD) applied to computed tomographic (CT) colonography can help improve sensitivity of polyp detec

77 ual-energy CT improves polyp detection in CT colonography compared with conventional CT at different

78 colonic diseases, functional;" "diagnosis;" "colonography;" "computed tomographic (CT)") and the date

79 ribed, and combining PET with nonlaxative CT colonography could improve accuracy.

80 ervals (CIs) for the relationship between CT colonography coverage and CRC screening.

81 Similarly, patients with CT colonography coverage had a greater likelihood of being

82 As a primary colorectal screening tool, CT colonography covered by third-party payers has an accept

83 nsional (3D) endoluminal computed tomography colonography (CTC) after retrograde fly-through, combine

84 tic yield from parallel computed tomographic colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) screenin

85 olonoscopy if "virtual" computed tomographic colonography (CTC) became a widely accepted modality for

86 PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Computed tomography colonography (CTC) continues to mature and evolve as a n

87 mical testing (FIT), or computed tomographic colonography (CTC) every 5 years.

88 orectal cancer with computerized tomographic colonography (CTC) instead of colonoscopy.

89 conclusions on whether computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is an acceptable screening option, an

90 e of colorectal cancer; computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is an alternative, less invasive test

91 Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is used to examine the colorectum and

92 Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) might be a more sensitive and accepta

93 cal colonoscopy (OC) or computed tomographic colonography (CTC) requires a laxative bowel preparation

94 Seven studies of computed tomographic colonography (CTC) with bowel preparation demonstrated p

95 Computed tomographic colonography (CTC), also known as virtual colonoscopy, h

96 st barium enema (ACBE), computed tomographic colonography (CTC), and colonoscopy, to detect colon pol

97 magnetic resonance (MR), computed tomography colonography (CTC), and positron emission tomography (PE

98 without stool testing, computed tomographic colonography (CTC), or colonoscopy starting at age 45, 5

99 Computed tomography colonography (CTC), particularly using noncathartic tech

100 CT colonography (CTC), when used in CRC screening, effectiv

101 rmission was obtained to use deidentified CT colonography data for this prospective reader study.

102 Ten radiologists each read 25 CT colonography data sets (12 men, 13 women; mean age, 61 y

103 pectively obtained computed tomographic (CT) colonography data sets by using consensus reading (three

104 Twenty CT colonography data sets from 14 men (median age, 61 years

105 obtained from all institutions for use of CT colonography data sets in this study.

106 ective study was performed by using DICOM CT colonography data sets obtained in 20 adult patients.

107 Forty-seven computed tomographic (CT) colonography data sets were obtained in 26 men and 10 wo

108 ed from all donor institutions for use of CT colonography data sets.

109 mplication rates were obtained by using a CT colonography database and review of medical records.

110 Diagnostic studies evaluating CT colonography detection of colorectal cancer were assesse

111 Computed tomographic colonography detects neoplasias with high levels of sens

112 gists reviewed two- and three-dimensional CT colonography displays and graded image quality with a fi

113 Two-dimensional and 3D CT colonography displays were generated from data obtained

114 Although MR colonography does not require ionizing radiation, the ra

115 ncer screening in the United States, with MR colonography emerging as another viable option in Europe

116 ar-old subjects in the United States with CT colonography every 5 or 10 years were compared with thos

117 The second-tier tests include CT colonography every 5 years, the FIT-fecal DNA test every

118 nd from data obtained at in vivo clinical CT colonography examinations performed in 10 patients (five

119 eos extracted from computed tomographic (CT) colonography examinations.

120 CT colonography exceeds the performance of nonendoscopic ap

121 tivity of 0.90 (i.e., 90%) indicates that CT colonography failed to detect a lesion measuring 10 mm o

122 he 144 lesions were categorized as likely CT colonography false-positive findings (no further action)

123 ed (ie, despite a priori knowledge of the CT colonography findings) OC require additional review beca

124 ere directly compared against the initial CT colonography findings.

125 (non- or full-laxative computed tomographic colonography, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy).

126 ing informed consent from the readers, 12 CT colonography fly-through examinations that depicted eigh

127 ng 40% (31 of 78) of those with OC and/or CT colonography follow-up.

128 rver error), the per-polyp sensitivity of CT colonography for adenomas 10.0 mm or larger increased to

129 2%, respectively (P < .001 for mt-sDNA vs CT colonography for all except 6-mm CRC at CT colonography)

130 etrospective biomechanical CT analysis of CT colonography for colorectal cancer screening provides a

131 The sensitivity of CT colonography for colorectal cancer was 96.1% (398 of 414

132 Conclusion Insurance coverage of CT colonography for CRC screening was associated with a gre

133 rance coverage for computed tomographic (CT) colonography for CRC screening.

134 oscopy, the accuracy of computed tomographic colonography for detection of large lesions appears to b

135 The actual specificity of screening CT colonography for extracolonic findings in clinical pract

136 the application of computed tomographic (CT) colonography for screening the asymptomatic average-risk

137 -enhanced microcomputed tomography (microCT) colonography for the noninvasive detection of colonic tu

138 en actual polyp size and that measured at CT colonography) for 2D transverse, 2D coronal, and 3D endo

139 ted tomographic (CT) virtual colonoscopy (CT colonography) for detecting polyps varies widely in rece

140 T) colonography, and magnetic resonance (MR) colonography-for colorectal cancer screening.

141 Although much about CT colonography has already been learned, more remains to b

142 c examination, and computed tomographic (CT) colonography has been studied extensively but the report

143 In recent years, CT colonography has been validated as an effective tool for

144 onizing radiation, the radiation dose for CT colonography has decreased substantially, and regular sc

145 CT colonography has superior patient acceptability compared

146 The performance of CT colonography has varied widely among published studies t

147 CT colonography helped detect eight of nine subjects with p

148 Overall, CT colonography helped identify 17 of 22 subjects with poly

149 greater likelihood of being screened with CT colonography (HR, 8.35; 95% CI: 7.11, 9.82) and with col

150 me of more than 180 mm(3) at surveillance CT colonography identified proven advanced neoplasia (inclu

151 ial expertise in colonography interpreted CT colonography images of 107 patients (60 with 142 polyps)

152 Experienced readers interpreted the CT colonography images unassisted and then reviewed all col

153 software system was applied to screening CT colonography in 1638 women and 1408 men (mean age, 56.9

154 arge colorectal polyps were identified at CT colonography in 43 (3.9%) of 1110 patients.

155 icians with regard to the current role of CT colonography in clinical practice.

156 , and the accuracy of test performance of CT colonography in community settings remain uncertain.

157 gh rates of false-positive diagnoses with CT colonography in exchange for diagnosis of extracolonic m

158 acceptability of combined nonlaxative PET/CT colonography in patients at higher risk of colorectal ne

159 The role of CT colonography in screening asymptomatic patients is contr

160 ngs augment published data on the role of CT colonography in screening patients with an average risk

161 erences in sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography in the two age cohorts (age < 65 years and

162 efit in the detection of 6-9-mm polyps at CT colonography in this cohort.

163 endoscopic ultrasound, fecal testing and CT colonography in this setting.

164 ng interpretation of 3D three-dimensional CT colonography in this study occurred in either the discov

165 matic adults undergoing routine screening CT colonography, including about one invasive CRC per 500 c

166 ained in CT but without special expertise in colonography interpreted CT colonography images of 107 p

167 Computed tomographic colonography is a new and noninvasive method to evaluate

168 Computed tomographic (CT) colonography is a noninvasive option in screening for co

169 Virtual colonoscopy or computed-tomography colonography is a promising new method for colorectal ca

170 CT colonography is a safe and effective screening modality

171 rrent data suggest that computed tomographic colonography is a viable colon cancer screening modality

172 Noncathartic CT colonography is an effective screening method in first-d

173 etection (CAD) for computed tomographic (CT) colonography is as effective as optical colonoscopy for

174 settings with sufficient quality control, CT colonography is as sensitive as colonoscopy for large ad

175 diagnostic indications, computed tomography colonography is emerging as a potential frontline colore

176 Computed tomographic colonography is gaining momentum as a potential primary

177 CT colonography is highly sensitive for colorectal cancer,

178 Computed tomographic colonography is highly specific, but the range of report

179 CT colonography is performed routinely for some indications

180 but the clinical role of computed tomography colonography is rapidly evolving.

181 aneous PET acquisition during nonlaxative CT colonography is technically feasible, is well tolerated,

182 on Faster navigation speed at endoluminal CT colonography led to progressive restriction of visual se

183 -sided lesions were detected at follow-up CT colonography, many of which were flat, serrated lesions.

184 identification for computed tomography (CT) colonography Materials and Methods Institutional review

185 prevalence of colorectal cancer, primary CT colonography may be more suitable than OC for initial in

186 Computed tomographic colonography may have harms resulting from low-dose ioni

187 cent studies that show the sensitivity of CT colonography may not be as great when performed and the

188 were less satisfied than those undergoing CT colonography (median score of 61 and interquartile range

189 uartile range [IQR], 2-7) than during PET/CT colonography (median, 5; IQR, 3-7; P = 0.03) and were mo

190 feasible in live mice by using this microCT colonography method.

191 We investigated whether magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) can be used to screen for colorectal

192 NBS by histopathology and magnetic resonance colonography (MRC).

193 del of colon cancer using magnetic resonance colonography (MRC).

194 o undergo either colonoscopy (n = 362) or CT colonography (n = 185) received a validated questionnair

195 All attendees and a sample of CT colonography nonattendees (n = 299) were contacted for a

196 ography attendees, and 182 of 299 (60.9%) CT colonography nonattendees responded.

197 CT colonography nonattendees were less likely to be men (OR

198 fecal DNA technology and computed tomography colonography now compete with colonoscopy as viable colo

199 The primary end point was detection by CT colonography of histologically confirmed large adenomas

200 or larger were prospectively reported at CT colonography, of which 222 (94.9%; 95% CI: 91.3%, 97.0%)

201 ied with higher confidence at prospective CT colonography (on a 3-point confidence scale: mean, 2.8 v

202 CT colonography-optical colonoscopy concordance and proxima

203 ancer and prevent cancer from developing (CT colonography or colonoscopy).

204 For mt-sDNA versus 6-mm-threshold CT colonography, overall detection rates for advanced neopl

205 Total CT colonography pain and burden were also lower with alfent

206 agnesium citrate should be considered for CT colonography, particularly in patients at risk for phosp

207 CT colonography performance estimates from the trial were i

208 ) were depicted at computed tomographic (CT) colonography performed in 36 patients (26 men, 10 women;

209 der confidence in a dedicated dual-energy CT colonography phantom, especially with suboptimal fecal t

210 and 1.9% respectively; for 6-mm-threshold CT colonography, PPVs were 76.8%, 44.3%, and 2.7%; for 10-m

211 .8%, 44.3%, and 2.7%; for 10-mm-threshold CT colonography, PPVs were 84.5%, 75.2%, and 5.2%, respecti

212 Overall, 19.5% of polyps detected at CT colonography proved to be advanced neoplasia and did not

213 y lesions of 6 mm or larger identified at CT colonography (rectum-to-splenic flexure) and (b) of unde

214 current publicity, many issues concerning CT colonography remain.

215 Radiologists trained in CT colonography reported all lesions measuring 5 mm or more

216 Radiologists certified in CT colonography reported lesions 5 mm in diameter or larger

217 malities were classified according to the CT Colonography Reporting and Data System (C-RADS).

218 have been incorporated into the consensus CT Colonography Reporting and Data System (C-RADS).

219 orized by using the computed tomography (CT) colonography reporting and data system (C-RADS).

220 Polyp location, CT Colonography Reporting and Data System categorization, a

221 ch as distress), with patients undergoing CT colonography reporting less intense negative affect.

222 masslike findings in the sigmoid colon at CT colonography, representing chronic diverticular disease

223 xamined intra- and extracolonic organs or CT colonography restricted to the colon, across different s

224 e normal in 29 (42.6%) of 68 patients; at CT colonography, results were correctly identified as norma

225 However, combined PET/CT colonography review improved per-patient positive predic

226 Characteristics of the CT colonography scanner, including width of collimation, ty

227 ximum linear sizes of polyps in vivo with CT colonography scans at baseline and surveillance follow-u

228 Positive rates for large polyps at repeat CT colonography screening (3.7%) were lower compared with t

229 93 men) patients have returned for repeat CT colonography screening (mean interval, 5.7 years +/- 0.9

230 mm polyps detected and removed at initial CT colonography screening (without surveillance).

231 mfort from bowel preparation may increase CT colonography screening acceptability.

232 detected at repeat computed tomographic (CT) colonography screening after initial negative findings a

233 tal cancer (CRC) and compare results with CT colonography screening at the same center.Materials and

234 .2 years; age range, 50-97 years) undergoing colonography screening between April 2004 and December 2

235 women, 378 men) who underwent nonenhanced CT colonography screening between April 2004 and March 2005

236 A similar analysis was performed for CT colonography screening during a 15-year interval (2004-2

237 The demand for CT colonography screening from primary care physicians and

238 n = 577) from the University of Wisconsin CT colonography screening program (n = 5176) was undertaken

239 re and Medicaid Services in 2014, whereas CT colonography screening remains underused and is not cove

240 Results Repeat CT colonography screening was positive for lesions 6 mm or

241 detection rates of advanced neoplasia at CT colonography screening were greater than those of multit

242 %) adults (compared with 14.3% at initial CT colonography screening, P = .29).

243 ; mean age, 58.1 years) underwent primary CT colonography screening.

244 eening after initial negative findings at CT colonography screening.

245 Materials and Methods Among 5640 negative CT colonography screenings (no polyps >/= 6 mm) performed b

246 Computed tomographic colonography seems as likely as colonoscopy to detect le

247 For large neoplasms, mean estimates for CT colonography sensitivity and specificity among the older

248 For large neoplasms in the younger group, CT colonography sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 (95%

249 CT colonography sensitivity for polyps 6 mm or larger was 9

250 contrast barium enema or computed tomography colonography should be performed preoperatively, and col

251 is feasibility study suggest that CAD for CT colonography significantly improves per-polyp detection

252 CAD for CT colonography significantly increases per-patient and per

253 parity in results of reported large-scale CT colonography studies in asymptomatic subjects may be exp

254 patients with neoplastic carpet lesions, CT colonography studies were analyzed to determine maximal

255 CT colonography studies were scored according to presence o

256 The odds ratio for a growing polyp at CT colonography surveillance to become an advanced adenoma

257 mediate optical colonoscopy or short-term CT colonography surveillance.

258 al colonoscopy and 46 (60%) of whom chose CT colonography surveillance.

259 views, both in vitro and in vivo, for the CT colonography system evaluated.

260 Specific CT colonography techniques were cataloged.

261 n, only a few studies examined the newest CT colonography technology.

262 Sizes measured at CT colonography tend to lie between those measured at optic

263 d with bowel preparation was higher among CT colonography than FS attendees (OR, 2.77; 95% confidence

264 nts where they chose between unrestricted CT colonography that examined intra- and extracolonic organ

265 linically unsuspected cancers detected at CT colonography that were identified at retrospective revie

266 s with left-sided-only polyps detected at CT colonography, the additional yield of complete optical c

267 patients with positive findings at repeat CT colonography, the findings were directly compared agains

268 flexible sigmoidoscopy, computed tomography colonography, the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test,

269 ses (>/=3 cm) prospectively identified at CT colonography (there were two nonneoplastic rectal false-

270 cedures were performed on the same day as CT colonography, thereby avoiding the need for repeat bowel

271 endoluminal polyp location at subsequent CT colonography, thereby facilitating detection of known po

272 nical and technical advances have allowed CT colonography to advance slowly from a research tool to a

273 All three models predict CT colonography to be more costly and less effective than n

274 ege of Radiology Imaging Network National CT Colonography Trial provided informed consent, and approv

275 contrast barium enema), computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy) and stool-based molec

276 ic referral rate for positive findings at CT colonography was 6.4% (71 of 1110 patients).

277 Computed tomographic colonography was accurate in detecting adenomas 10 mm or

278 CT colonography was also performed on 10 control subjects w

279 andalone CT colonography and combined PET/CT colonography was compared with the reference colonoscopy

280 The sensitivity of CT colonography was heterogeneous but improved as polyp siz

281 The major contributor to error at CT colonography was observer perceptual error, while observ

282 CT colonography was performed in 500 men (mean age, 62.5 ye

283 Low-dose CT colonography was performed with 64-detector CT by using

284 ceiver-operating-characteristic curve for CT colonography were 0.90+/-0.03, 0.86+/-0.02, 0.23+/-0.02,

285 of mt-sDNA and 6-mm- and 10-mm-threshold CT colonography were 13.1%, 12.3%, and 5.9%, respectively.

286 mt-sDNA and for 6-mm- and 10-mm-threshold CT colonography were 15.2%, 16.4%, and 6.7%, respectively.

287 ositive and negative predictive values of CT colonography were assessed for detecting subjects with a

288 rmed the following day, and findings from CT colonography were disclosed for each segment.

289 No cancers were missed at CT colonography when both cathartic and tagging agents were

290 6 adults (mean age, 57.1 years) underwent CT colonography, which yielded 2606 nondiminutive (>/=6 mm)

291 verage- and high-risk patients undergoing CT colonography will be found to have clinically important

292 Polyps were measured at CT colonography with 2D MPR and 3D endoluminal displays and

293 lonic neoplasia underwent nonlaxative PET/CT colonography with barium fecal tagging within 2 wk of sc

294 ground Limited cathartic preparations for CT colonography with fecal tagging can improve patient comf

295 on Dual-contrast spectral photon-counting CT colonography with iodine-filled lumen and gadolinium-tag

296 Prone and supine CT colonography with same-day optical colonoscopy was perfo

297 cificity was observed: The specificity of CT colonography with unassisted and that with CAD-assisted

298 The sensitivity of CT colonography with unassisted reading and that with CAD-a

299 ated adequate cleansing effectiveness for CT colonography, with better tagging and shorter interpreta

300 CT colonography without bowel preparation is a safer and be