Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Extracolonic findings and radiation at CT colonography: what the referring provider needs to know

  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A better understanding of the risks and benefits of extracolonic findings and radiation dose will aid in the safe and proper implementation of CT colonography in clinical practice. The majority of extracolonic findings in screening patients are benign and can be ignored by referring physicians. Radiologists also need to be responsible in reporting extracolonic findings. Referring providers must be knowledgeable about the theoretic risks and controversies regarding the use of ionizing radiation. Screening CT colonography imparts a low-level of radiation to patients that is equivalent or less than annual background dose.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Reproduced with permission from the American Journal of Roentgenology (Pooler et al. [35])

Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, et al. (2005) CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal. Radiology 236:3–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwng I, et al. (2003) Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 349:2191–2200

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, et al. (2008) Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin. 58:130–160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. US Preventative Task Force (2008) Screening for colorectal cancer: US Preventative Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Ann Intern Med 149:627–637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=220&TAId=58&NcaName=Screening+Computed+Tomography+Colonography+(CTC)+for+Colorectal+Cancer

  6. US Preventative Services Task Force (2016) Screening for colorectal cancer–US Preventative Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2016:2564–2575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lin JS, Piper M, Perdue LA, et al. (2016) Screening for colorectal cancer: updated evidence report and systemic review for the US preventive services task force. JAMA 315:2576–2594

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hara AK, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ (2000) Incidental extracolonic findings at CT colonography. Radiology 215:353–357

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gluecker TM, Johnson CD, Wilson LA, et al. (2003) Extracolonic findings at CT colonography: evaluation of prevalence and cost in a screening population. Gastroenterology 124:911–916

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chin M, Mendelson R, Edwards J, Foster N, Forbes G (2005) Computed tomographic colonography: prevalence, nature, and clinical significance of extracolonic findings in a community screening program. Am J Gastroenterol 100:2771–2776

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yee J, Kumar NN, Godara S, et al. (2005) Extracolonic abnormalities discovered incidentally at CT colonography in a male population. Radiology 236:519–526

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, et al. (2007) CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med. 357(14):1403–1412

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Flicker MS, Tsoukas AT, Hazra A, Dachman AH (2008) Economic impact of extracolonic findings at computed tomographic colonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 32:497–503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, et al. (2008) The national CT colonography trial: multicenter assessment of accuracy for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med 359:1207–1217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Pickhardt PJ, Hanson ME, Vanness DJ, et al. (2008) Unsuspected extracolonic findings at screening CT colonography: clinical and economic impact. Radiology. 249:151–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, Meiners RJ, et al. (2010) Colorectal and extracolonic cancers detected at screening CT colonography in 10,286 asymptomatic adults. Radiology 255(1):83–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Veerappan GR, Ally MR, Choi JH, et al. (2010) Extracolonic findings on CT colonography increases yield of colorectal cancer screening. AJR 195:677–686

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Hanson ME, Hinshaw JL (2010) CT colonography: performance and program outcome measures in an older screening population. Radiology. 254(2):493–500

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Macari M, Nevsky G, Bonavita J, et al. (2011) CT colonography in senior versus nonsenior patients: extracolonic findings, recommendations for additional imaging, and polyp prevalence. Radiology 259(3):767–774

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zalis ME, Blake MA, Cai W, et al. (2012) Diagnostic accuracy of laxative-free computed tomographic colonography for detection of adenomatous polyps in asymptomatic adults: a prospective evaluation. Ann Intern Med 156:692–702

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cash BD, Riddle M, et al. (2012) Observed outcomes with computerized tomographic colonography in a Medicare-aged screening population: an analysis of over 1,400 patients. AJR 199:W27–W34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Stoop EM, de Haan MC, de Wijkerslooth TR, et al. (2012) Participation and yield of colonoscopy vs non-cathartic CT colonography in population-based screening for colorectal cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 13:55–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pooler BD, Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ (2016) Potentially important extracolonic findings at screening CT colonography: incidence and outcomes data from a clinical screening program. AJR 206:313–318

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Pooler BD, Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ (2016) Indeterminate but likely unimportant extracolonic findings at screening CT colonography (C-RADS category E3): incidence and outcomes data from a clinical screening program. AJR 207:996–1001

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Khan KY, Xiong T, McCafferty I, et al. (2007) Frequency and impact of extracolonic findings detected at computed tomographic colonography in a symptomatic patient. Br J Radiol 94:355–361

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Spreng A, Netzer P, Mattich J, et al. (2005) Importance of extracolonic findings at IV contrast medium-enhanced CT colonography versus those at non-enhanced CT colonography. Eur Radiol 15:2088–2095

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hellstrom M, Svensson MH, Lasson A (2004) Extracolonic and incidental findings on CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). AJR 182:631–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Edwards JT, Wood CJ, Mendelson RM, Forbes GM (2001) Extracolonic findings at virtual colonoscopy: implications for screening programs. Am J Gastroenterol 96:3009–3012

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Wonhainen A, Lundkvist J, Bergqvist D, Bjorck M (2005) Cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies for abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg 41:741–751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Wilmink AB, Quick CR, Hubbard CS, Day NE (2003) Effectiveness and cost of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm-results of a population screening program. J Vasc Surg 38:72–77

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Laghi A, et al. (2008) Computed tomographic colonography to screen for colorectal cancer, extracolonic cancer, and aortic aneurysm: model simulation with cost-effectiveness analysis. Arch Intern Med. 168(7):696–705

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Fletcher RH, Pignone M (2008) Extracolonic findings with computed tomographic colonography, asset or liability? Arch Intern Med 168:685–686

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, et al. (2001) Methods Working Group; third US Preventive Services Task Force. Current methods for the US Preventative Services Task Force-a review of the process. Am J Prev Med 20:21–35

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cochrane AL, Holland WW (1971) Validation of screening procedures. Br Med Bull 27:3–8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Pooler DB, Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ (2017) Extracolonic findings at screening CT colonography: prevalence, benefits, challenges and opportunities. AJR 209:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Chin J, Syrek Jensen T, Ashby L, et al. (2015) Screening for lung cancer with low dose CT-translating science into Medicare coverage policy. NEJM 372:2083–2085

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Berland LL, Silverman SG, Gore RM, et al. (2010) Managing incidental findings on abdominal CT: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee. J Am Coll Radiol 7:754–773

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Patel MD, Ascher SM, Paspulati RM, et al. (2013) Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, part 1: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee II on adnexal findings. J Am Coll Radiol 10:675–681

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Heller MT, Harisinghani M, Neitlich JD, Yeghiayan P, Berland LL (2013) Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, part 3: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee II on splenic and nodal findings. J Am Coll Radiol 10:833–839

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Sebastian S, Araujo C, Neitlich JD, Berland LL (2013) Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, part 4: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee II on gallbladder and biliary findings. J Am Coll Radiol 10:953–956

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Doshi AM, Kiritsy M, Rosenkrantz AB (2015) Strategies for avoiding recommendations for additional imaging through a comprehensive comparison with prior studies. J Am Coll Radiol 12:657–663

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. https://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/National-Radiology-Data-Registry/CT-Colonography/Registry

  43. Radiation Control: Health Facilities and Clinics, SB1237, February 19, 2010. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_12011250/sb1237bill_20100929chaptered.html.

  44. Radiation Dose in X-Ray and CT Exams. Effective radiation dose in adults. https://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/info.cfm?pg=safety-xray.

  45. Health Physics Society (2016) Radiation risk in perspective. Position Statement of the Health Physics Society. http://hps.org/documents/risk_ps010-3.pdf.

  46. American Association of Physicists in Medicine (2017) Position statement on radiation risks from medical imaging procedures. http://www.aapm.org/org/policies/details.asp?id=318&type=PP&current=true.

  47. Berrington de González A, Kim KP, Knudsen AB, et al. (2011) Radiation-related cancer risks from CT colonography screening: a risk-benefit analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:816–823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Brink JA, Amis ES (2010) Image wisely: a campaign to increase awareness about adult radiation protection. Radiology 257:601–602

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Applegate K, Frush DP (2017) Image gently: a decade of international collaborations to promote appropriate imaging for children. J Am Coll Radiol 14:956–957

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. McCollough CH, Leng S, Yu L, et al. (2011) CT dose index and patient dose: they are not the same thing. Radiology 259:311–316

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Thakur Y, McLaughlin PD, Mayo JR (2013) Strategies for radiation dose optimization. Curr Radiol Rep 1:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. AAPM Report No. 96: the measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT. (2008). https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT_96.pdf.

  53. Flicek KT, Hara AK, Silva AC, et al. (2010) Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: a pilot study. AJR 195:126–131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. ACR-SAR-SCBT-MR practice parameter for the performance of computed tomography (CT) colonography in adults. https://www.acr.org/~/media/ACR/Documents/PGTS/guidelines/CT_Colonography.pdf.

  55. Habibzadeh MA, Ay MR, Asl AR, Ghadiri H, Zaidi H (2012) Impact of miscentering on patient dose and image noise in x-ray CT imaging: phantom and clinical studies. Phys Med 28:191–199

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Chang KJ, Yee J (2013) Dose reduction methods for CT colonography. Abdom Imaging 38:224–232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Vogt C, Cohnen M, Beck A, et al. (2004) Detection of colorectal polyps by multislice CT colonography with ultra-low-dose technique: comparison with high-resolution videocolonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 60:201–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Iannaccone R, Catalano C, Mangiapane F, et al. (2005) Colorectal polyps: detection with low-dose multidetector row helical CT colonography versus two sequential colonoscopies. Radiology 237:927–937

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Ginsburg M, Obara P, Wise L, et al. (2013) BMI-based radiation dose reduction in CT colonography. Acad Radiol 20:486–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. McMillan K, Bostani M, Cagnon CH, et al. (2017) Estimating patient dose from CT exams that use automatic exposure control: development and validation of methods to accurately estimate tube current values. Med Phys 44:4262–4275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Elojeimy S, Tipnis S, Huda W (2010) Relationship between radiographic techniques (kilovolt and milliampere-second) and CTDI(VOL). Radiat Prot Dosimetry 141(1):43–49

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Seyal AR, Arslanoglu A, Abboud SF, et al. (2015) CT of the abdomen with reduced tube voltage in adults: a practical approach. Radiographics 35:1922–1939

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Chang KJ, Caovan DB, Grand DJ, et al. (2013) Reducing radiation dose at CT colonography: decreasing tube voltage to 100 kVp. Radiology 266:791–800

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Shin CI, Kim SH, Lee ES, et al. (2014) Ultra-low peak voltage CT colonography: effect of iterative reconstruction algorithms on performance of radiologists who use anthropomorphic colonic phantoms. Radiology 273:759–771

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Beister M, Kolditz D, Kalender WA (2012) Iterative reconstruction methods in X-ray CT. Phys Med 28:94–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Fletcher JG, Grant KL, Fidler JL, et al. (2012) Validation of dual-source single-tube reconstruction as a method to obtain half-dose images to evaluate radiation dose and noise reduction: phantom and human assessment using CT colonography and sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE). J Comput Assist Tomogr 36:560–569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Nagata K, Fujiwara M, Kanazawa H, et al. (2015) Evaluation of dose reduction and image quality in CT colonography: comparison of low-dose CT with iterative reconstruction and routine-dose CT with filtered back projection. Eur Radiol 25:221–229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Millerd PJ, Paden RG, Lund JT, et al. (2015) Reducing the radiation dose for computed tomography colonography using model-based iterative reconstruction. Abdom Imaging 40:1183–1189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Lambert L, Ourednicek P, Jahoda J, et al. (1048) Model-based vs hybrid iterative reconstruction technique in ultralow-dose submillisievert CT colonography. Br J Radiol 2015(88):20140667

    Google Scholar 

  70. Lubner MG, Pooler BD, Kitchin DR, et al. (2015) Sub-milliSievert (sub-mSv) CT colonography: a prospective comparison of image quality and polyp conspicuity at reduced-dose versus standard-dose imaging. Eur Radiol 25:2089–2102

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, 111 East 210th St, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA

    Judy Yee

  2. SSM St. Joseph Health Center, 300 Capitol Drive, St. Charles, MO, 63301, USA

    Elizabeth McFarland

Authors
  1. Judy Yee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth McFarland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Judy Yee.

Ethics declarations

Funding

No funding was provided for this manuscript.

Conflict of interest

Judy Yee, MD, FACR has received research Grants from Echopixel and Philips. Elizabeth McFarland, MD is a member of the Medical Advisory Board for Vital Images.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yee, J., McFarland, E. Extracolonic findings and radiation at CT colonography: what the referring provider needs to know. Abdom Radiol 43, 554–565 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1461-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1461-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation