Advertisement

Patient Preparation and Tagging

  • Dipti K. Lenhart
  • Rocio Perez Johnston
  • Michael E. Zalis
Chapter

Abstract

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) has become widely used over the past decade as a complementary method for colorectal cancer screening. Achieving consistently high performance with the examination depends on the quality of a number of factors, including: patient preparation prior to the examination, colonic distension, computed tompgraphic (CT) scanning parameters and data acquisition, postprocessing of data, 2D and 3D navigation workstations, and interpretation by the radiologist. This chapter will focus on patient preparation for the examination, including cathartic colonic cleansing as well as fecal and fluid tagging.

Keywords

Compute Tomographic Colonography Colorectal Cancer Screening Optical Colonoscopy Magnesium Citrate Sodium Phosphate Solution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Johnson CD, et al. Noncathartic CT colonography with stool tagging: performance with and without electronic stool subtraction. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190(2):361–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pickhardt PJ, Choi JH. Electronic cleansing and stool tagging in CT colonography: advantages and pitfalls with primary three-dimensional evaluation. Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181(3):799–805.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gelfand DW, Chen MY, Ott DJ. Preparing the colon for the barium enema examination. Radiology. 1991;178(3):609–613.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Park SH, et al. Fundamental elements for successful performance of CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). Korean J Radiol. 2007;8(4):264–275.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jensch S, et al. Image quality and patient acceptance of four regimens with different amounts of mild laxatives for CT colonography. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191(1):158–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ganeshan A, et al. Minimal-preparation CT colon in detection of colonic cancer, the Oxford experience. Age Ageing. 2007;36(1):48–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim DH, et al. Prospective blinded trial comparing 45-mL and 90-mL doses of oral sodium phosphate for bowel preparation before computed tomographic colonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2007;31(1):53–58.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mang T, et al. CT colonography: techniques, indications, findings. Eur J Radiol. 2007;61(3):388–399.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zalis, M.E., et al., Tagging-based, electronically cleansed CT colonography: evaluation of patient comfort and image readability. Radiology. 2006;239(1):149–159.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ristvedt SL, et al. Patient preferences for CT colonography, conventional colonoscopy, and bowel preparation. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98(3):578–585.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Gelder RE, et al. CT colonography and colonoscopy: assessment of patient preference in a 5-week follow-up study. Radiology. 2004;233(2):328–337.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Macari M, et al. Effect of different bowel preparations on residual fluid at CT colonography. Radiology. 2001;218(1):274–277.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Borden ZS, et al. Bowel preparation for CT colonography: blinded comparison of magnesium citrate and sodium phosphate for catharsis. Radiology. 2010;254(1):138–144.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zalis ME, et al. Polyp size at CT colonography after electronic subtraction cleansing in an anthropomorphic colon phantom. Radiology. 2005;236(1):118–124.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Slater A, et al. Colonic polyps: effect of attenuation of tagged fluid and viewing window on conspicuity and measurement – in vitro experiment with porcine colonic specimen. Radiology. 2006;240(1):101–109.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pickhardt PJ. Screening CT colonography: how I do it. Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189(2):290–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liedenbaum MH, et al. CT colonography with minimal bowel preparation: evaluation of tagging quality, patient acceptance and diagnostic accuracy in two iodine-based preparation schemes. Eur Radiol. 2009; 2010;20:367–376.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zalis ME, et al. CT colonography: digital subtraction bowel cleansing with mucosal reconstruction initial observations. Radiology. 2003;226(3):911–917.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zalis ME, Hahn PF. Digital subtraction bowel cleansing in CT colonography. Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176(3):646–648.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Johnson CD, et al. Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(12):1207–1217.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim DH, et al. CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(14):1403–1412.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dipti K. Lenhart
  • Rocio Perez Johnston
  • Michael E. Zalis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging and InterventionMassachusetts General HospitalBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations