Comparison of extracolonic findings and clinical outcomes in a screening and diagnostic CT colonography population
To compare the distribution of extracolonic findings and clinical outcomes between screening and diagnostic CT colonography (CTC) populations.
388 consecutive patients (369 men, 19 women; mean ± SD age 67.8 ± 10 years) who underwent first-time CTC (4/2011–4/2017) at a Veteran’s Affairs Medical Center were divided into screening (asymptomatic) or diagnostic (symptomatic) cohorts based on CTC indication. CTC reporting and data system E-scores for extracolonic findings were retrospectively assigned based on prospective CTC radiologic reports. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine the association between E-scores and CTC indication. Electronic medical records of all patients with E3 or E4 scores were reviewed (median follow-up 2.8 years) to determine clinical outcomes.
68% (262/388) underwent screening and 32% (126/388) diagnostic CTC. 7.2% (28/388) had extracolonic findings considered potentially significant (E4), 4.4% (17/388) had indeterminate but likely unimportant findings (E3), and 88.4% (347/388) had normal or unimportant findings (E1 or E2). E-scores were not significantly different between screening and diagnostic CTC when adjusted for age, gender, and prior imaging (p = 0.44). 4.6% (12/262) of patients with E3/E4 findings in the screening cohort demonstrated clinically significant outcomes, compared with 4.0% (5/126) in the diagnostic cohort, including a total of three extracolonic malignancies (0.8%) and three abdominal aortic aneurysms (0.8%). 4.6% (18/388) underwent follow-up imaging studies to confirm a benign outcome after detection of a category E3/E4 finding.
The distribution of extracolonic findings and clinical outcomes were not statistically significantly different between screening and diagnostic CTC populations.
KeywordsCT colonography Extracolonic findings C-RADS Screening
We acknowledge the efforts of Kenny Ye, Ph.D. in statistical consultation.
Compliance with ethical standards
Judy Yee, MD, FACR has received research Grants from Echopixel and Philips. No other author has disclosures.
This study was approved by the institutional review board. The requirement for informed consent was waived.
- 4.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 Am J Roentgenol 207(5):996–1001. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.16275 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar