EXTRACOLONIC FINDINGS—IDENTIFICATION AT LOW-DOSE CTC

Abstract In contrast to optical colonoscopy, computed tomography colonography (CTC) has the ability to reveal pathology outside of the colon. While identification of colorectal lesions at CTC requires only limited radiation dose, the detection of abnormalities in extracolonic soft tissue requires mo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Radiation protection dosimetry Vol. 195; no. 3-4; pp. 188 - 197
Main Authors: Thorén, Fredrik, Johnsson, Åse A, Hellström, Mikael, Båth, Magnus
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: England Oxford University Press 12-10-2021
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract In contrast to optical colonoscopy, computed tomography colonography (CTC) has the ability to reveal pathology outside of the colon. While identification of colorectal lesions at CTC requires only limited radiation dose, the detection of abnormalities in extracolonic soft tissue requires more radiation. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of ultra-low-dose (ULD) CTC on the detection and characterisation of extracolonic findings. In a prospective study 49 patients with colorectal symptoms were examined with CTC adding a ULD series (mean effective dose 0.9 ± 0.4 mSv) to the normal unenhanced standard dose (SD) series (mean effective dose 3.6 ± 1.2 mSv). Five radiologists individually and blindly evaluated the ULD, followed by evaluation of the SD after ≥9 weeks (median 35 weeks). A ViewDEX-based examination protocol was used, including a confidence scale and a graded assessment of need for follow-up according to the CTC Reporting and Data System (C-RADS E0–E4). The reference findings comprised the combined information from CTC (ULD, SD and contrast-enhanced CTC series) and a 4-year radiological and clinical follow-up. For the overall detection of reference findings (E2–E4) we found a statistically significant difference in favour of SD. This, however, was not the case when looking at classification of possibly important/important reference findings (E3–E4). Our results suggest that CTC with ULD (0.9 mSv) is comparable to SD (3.6 mSv) for identification of clinically relevant extracolonic pathology, but there is a large inter-observer variability.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0144-8420
1742-3406
1742-3406
DOI:10.1093/rpd/ncab054