In the evaluation of computed tomography colonogra-phy (virtual colonoscopy) (CTC) examinations, there are basically two principles of reviewing: it can be done two-dimensionally (2D) or three-dimensionally (3D) (Fig. 11.1).
The simplest 2D approach is to view the axial helical or multiplanar reformatting (MPR) CT images without any additional processing. However, in practice this approach will be combined with 3D-rendered images. The method is named primary 2D if 3D is only used for problem-solving. Alternatively, evaluation of CTC examinations can be done with a primary 3D approach, in which an (endo)luminal 3D view of the colon is combined with a requisite 2D method.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Beaulieu CF, Jeffrey RB, Karadi C et al (1999) Display modes for CT-colonography — part II. Blinded comparison of axial CT and virtual endoscopic and panoramic endoscopic volume-rendered studies. Radiology 212:203–212
Cotton PB, Durkalski VL, Benoit PC et al (2004) Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy)—a multi-center comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. J Am Med Assoc 291:1713–1719
East JE, Saunders B P, Burling D et al (2007) Surface visualization at CT colonography simulated colonoscopy: effect of varying field of view and retrograde view. Am J Gastroenterol 102:2529–2535
Fenlon HM, Nunes D P, Schroy PC et al (1999) A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med 341:1496–1503
Gluecker TM, Johnson CD, Harmsen WS et al (2003) Colorectal cancer screening with CT-colonography, colonoscopy, and double-contrast barium enema examination: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences. Radiology 227:378–384
Hoppe H, Quattropani C, Spreng A et al (2004) Virtual colon dissection with CT-colonography compared with axial interpretation and conventional colonoscopy: preliminary results. Am J Roentgenol 182:1151–1158
Hopper KD, Iyriboz AT, Wise SW et al (2000) Mucosal detail at CT virtual reality: surface versus volume rendering. Radiology 214:517–522
Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C et al (2004) Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 127:1300–1311
Jensch S, de Vries AH, Peringa J et al (2008) CT-colonography with limited bowel preparation: performance characteristics in an increased-risk population. Radiology 247:122–132
Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, Wilson LA et al (2003a) Prospective blinded evaluation of computed tomographic colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 125:311–319
Johnson CD, Toledano AY, Herman BA et al (2003b) Computerized tomographic colonography: performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting. Gastroenterology 125:688–695
Johnson CD, Fletcher JG, MacCarty RL et al (2007) Effect of slice thickness and primary 2D versus 3D virtual dissection on colorectal lesion detection at CT-colonography in 452 asymptomatic adults. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:672–680
Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY et al (2008) Accuracy of CT-colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med 359:1207–1217
Kim SH, Lee JM, Eun HW et al (2007a) Two- versus three-dimensional colon evaluation with recently developed virtual dissection software for CT-colonography. Radiology 244:852–864
Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ et al (2007b) CT-colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neopla-sia. N Engl J Med 357:1403–1412
Lee A, Pickhardt P (2004) Polyp visualization at CT-colonography: comparison of 2D axial and 3D endoluminal displays. In: Proceedings of the 90th Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting of the Radiological Society of North America, Chicago
Lefere PA, Gryspeerdt SS, Dewyspelaere J et al (2002) Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT-colonography: initial results–polyp detection and patient acceptance. Radiology 224:393–403
Lefere P, Gryspeerdt S, Marrannes J et al (2005) CT-colonography after fecal tagging with a reduced cathartic cleansing and a reduced volume of barium. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1836–1842
Macari M, Milano A, Lavelle M et al (2000) Comparison of time-efficient CT-colonography with two- and three-dimensional colonic evaluation for detecting colorectal polyps. Am J Roentgenol 174:1543–1549
Macari M, Lee J, Garcia Figueiras R et al (2004) Primary 2D versus 3D interpretation techniques using thin section multi- detector row CT-colonography (CT-colonography). In: Proceedings of the 90th Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting of the Radiological Society of North America, Chicago
McFarland EG, Brink JA, Pilgram TK et al (2001) Spiral CT-colonography: reader agreement and diagnostic performance with two- and three-dimensional image-display techniques. Radiology 218:375–383
Pickhardt PJ, Choi JH (2003) Electronic cleansing and stool tagging in CT-colonography: advantages and pitfalls with primary three-dimensional evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:799–805
Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I et al (2003) Computed tomo-graphic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neopla-sia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 349:2191–2200
Pickhardt PJ (2004) Translucency rendering in 3D endolumi-nal CT colonography: a useful tool for increasing polyp specificity and decreasing interpretation time. Am J Roentgenol 183:429–436
Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Gopal DV (2006) Surface visualization at 3D endoluminal CT-colonography: degree of coverage and implications for polyp detection. Gastroenterology 130:1582–1587
Pickhardt PJ, Lee AD, Taylor AJ et al (2007) Primary 2D versus primary 3D polyp detection at screening CT-colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:1451–1456
Pineau BC, Paskett ED, Chen GJ et al (2003) Virtual colonoscopy using oral contrast compared with colonoscopy for the detection of patients with colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 125:304–310
Rex DK (2002) Current colorectal cancer screening strategies: overview and obstacles to implementation. Rev Gastroenterol Disord 2(Suppl 1):S2–S11
Serlie I, Vos FM, van Gelder RE et al (2001) Improved visualization in virtual colonoscopy using image-based rendering. In: Proceedings of the Joint Eurographics and IEEE TCVG Symposium on Visualization, Switzerland
Serlie IWO, de Vries AH, van Vliet LJ et al (2008) Lesion conspi-cuity and efficiency of CT colonography with electronic cleansing based on a three-material transition model. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:1493–1502
Taylor SA, Laghi A, Lefere P et al (2007) European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR): consensus statement on CT-colonography. Eur Radiol 17:575–579
van Gelder RE, Birnie E, Florie J et al (2004a) CT-colonography and colonoscopy: assessment of patient preference in a 5-week follow-up study. Radiology 233:328–337
van Gelder RE, Nio CY, Florie J et al (2004b) Computed tomo-graphic colonography compared with colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. Gastroenter-ology 127:41–48
van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Florie J et al (2004c) CT-colonography: feasibility of substantial dose reduction— comparison of medium to very low doses in identical patients. Radiology 232:611–620
van Gelder RE, Florie J, Nio CY et al (2007) A comparison of primary two- and three-dimensional methods to review CT-colonography. Eur Radiol 17:1181–1192
Vos FM, van Gelder RE, Serlie IWO et al (2003) Three dimensional display modes for CT-colonography: conventional 3D virtual colonoscopy versus unfolded cube projection. Radiology 228:878–885
Weitzman ER, Zapka J, Estabrook B et al (2001) Risk and reluctance: understanding impediments to colorectal cancer screening. Prev Med 32:502–513
Zalis ME, Perumpillichira JJ, Magee C et al (2006) Tagging-based, electronically cleansed CT colonography: evaluation of patient comfort and image readability. Radiology 239:149–159
Acknowledgments
Acknowledgments Frans M. Vos is acknowledged for his comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
de Vries, A.H., Stoker, J. (2010). 3D Imaging: Invaluable for the Correct Diagnosis?. In: Lefere, P., Gryspeerdt, S. (eds) Virtual Colonoscopy. Medical Radiology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79886-6_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79886-6_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-79879-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-79886-6
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)