Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2363041534
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pickhardt, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, A. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pickhardt, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, A. J.
(Radiology 2005;236:872-878.)
© RSNA, 2005


Gastrointestinal Imaging

Linear Polyp Measurement at CT Colonography: In Vitro and in Vivo Comparison of Two-dimensional and Three-dimensional Displays1

Perry J. Pickhardt, MD, Andrew D. Lee, MD, Elizabeth G. McFarland, MD and Andrew J. Taylor, MD

1 From the Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin Medical School, E3/311 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792-3252 (P.J.P., A.D.L., A.J.T.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Md (P.J.P.); Diagnostic Imaging Associates, St Luke's Hospital, Chesterfield, Mo (E.G.M.); and Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (E.G.M.). Received September 6, 2004; revision requested November 12; revision received December 13; accepted January 12, 2005. Address correspondence to P.J.P. (e-mail: pj.pickhardt{at}hosp.wisc.edu).

PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of polyp measurement at computed tomographic (CT) colonography by using two-dimensional (2D) multiplanar reformation (MPR) and three-dimensional (3D) endoluminal displays obtained both in a colon phantom and at clinical examinations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant study had institutional review board approval, and all patients provided signed informed consent, both of which allowed for additional retrospective evaluation. Two-dimensional and 3D CT colonography displays were generated from data obtained in an in vitro colon phantom that contained 10 6–13-mm synthetic polyps and from data obtained at in vivo clinical CT colonography examinations performed in 10 patients (five men, five women; mean age, 56.3 years) with proved polyps (size range, 7–25 mm). The reference standard for in vivo polyp size was optical colonoscopic measurement with a calibrated linear probe. Polyps were measured at CT colonography with 2D MPR and 3D endoluminal displays and electronic calipers by four radiologists who were unaware of the reference size measurements. The largest of the three 2D MPR measurements was considered the "optimized" 2D projection. Statistical analysis was performed with Wilcoxon signed rank, repeated-measures analysis of variance, and paired t testing.

RESULTS: For the phantom, the mean errors (differences between actual polyp size and that measured at CT colonography) for 2D transverse, 2D coronal, and 3D endoluminal displays were 1.6 mm ± 0.8 (standard deviation), 1.4 mm ± 0.7, and 0.8 mm ± 0.5, respectively. For in vivo polyp measurements, the mean errors for 2D transverse, 2D coronal, 2D sagittal, and 3D displays were 4.4 mm ± 3.5, 3.8 mm ± 3.3, 4.6 mm ± 3.0, and 1.9 mm ± 1.6, respectively. The 2D measurements underestimated actual polyp sizes in all cases. The differences in mean errors between 2D MPR and 3D endoluminal measurements were significant (P < .05). When the optimized 2D view was considered for in vivo measurement, the mean error decreased to 3.0 mm ± 2.6 (P = .2).

CONCLUSION: Linear polyp measurement on 3D endoluminal views was significantly more accurate than measurement on 2D transverse, coronal, or sagittal views, both in vitro and in vivo, for the CT colonography system evaluated. Use of the optimized 2D view substantially reduced 2D measurement error and may be valuable when used in conjunction with 3D measurement.

© RSNA, 2005




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
P. J. Pickhardt, C. Hassan, A. Laghi, A. Zullo, D. H. Kim, F. Iafrate, and S. Morini
Clinical Management of Small (6- to 9-mm) Polyps Detected at Screening CT Colonography: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2008; 191(5): 1509 - 1516.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
A. H. Dachman, K. B. Kelly, M. P. Zintsmaster, R. Rana, S. Khankari, J. D. Novak, A. N. Ali, A. Qalbani, and J. G. Fletcher
Formative Evaluation of Standardized Training for CT Colonographic Image Interpretation by Novice Readers
Radiology, October 1, 2008; 249(1): 167 - 177.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
C. van Wijk, J. Florie, C. Y. Nio, E. Dekker, A. H. de Vries, H. W. Venema, L. J. van Vliet, J. Stoker, and F. M. Vos
Protrusion Method for Automated Estimation of Polyp Size on CT Colonography
Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2008; 190(5): 1279 - 1285.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CA Cancer J ClinHome page
B. Levin, D. A. Lieberman, B. McFarland, R. A. Smith, D. Brooks, K. S. Andrews, C. Dash, F. M. Giardiello, S. Glick, T. R. Levin, et al.
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, May 1, 2008; 58(3): 130 - 160.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. H. Park, E. K. Choi, S. S. Lee, J. Y. Woo, S. Y. Chung, Y. J. Kim, J. K. Han, and H. K. Ha
Linear Polyp Measurement at CT Colonography: 3D Endoluminal Measurement with Optimized Surface-rendering Threshold Value and Automated Measurement
Radiology, December 1, 2007; 246(1): 157 - 167.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
D. H. Kim, P. J. Pickhardt, A. J. Taylor, W. K. Leung, T. C. Winter, J. L. Hinshaw, D. V. Gopal, M. Reichelderfer, R. H. Hsu, and P. R. Pfau
CT Colonography versus Colonoscopy for the Detection of Advanced Neoplasia
N. Engl. J. Med., October 4, 2007; 357(14): 1403 - 1412.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
F. J. Parrish
Volume CT: State-of-the-Art Reporting
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2007; 189(3): 528 - 534.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
P. J. Pickhardt
Screening CT Colonography: How I Do It
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2007; 189(2): 290 - 298.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
T. Doshi, D. Rusinak, R. A. Halvorsen, D. C. Rockey, K. Suzuki, and A. H. Dachman
CT Colonography: False-Negative Interpretations
Radiology, July 1, 2007; 244(1): 165 - 173.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. H. Park, E. K. Choi, S. S. Lee, J.-S. Byeon, J.-Y. Jo, Y. H. Kim, K. H. Lee, H. K. Ha, and J. K. Han
Polyp Measurement Reliability, Accuracy, and Discrepancy: Optical Colonoscopy versus CT Colonography with Pig Colonic Specimens
Radiology, July 1, 2007; 244(1): 157 - 164.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
D. H. Kim, P. J. Pickhardt, and A. J. Taylor
Characteristics of Advanced Adenomas Detected at CT Colonographic Screening: Implications for Appropriate Polyp Size Thresholds for Polypectomy Versus Surveillance
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2007; 188(4): 940 - 944.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. G. Fletcher, F. Booya, Z. Melton, K. Johnson, L. Guendel, B. Schmidt, C. H. McCollough, B. Young, J. L. Fidler, and W. S. Harmsen
Automated Polyp Measurement with CT Colonography: Preliminary Observations in a Phantom Colon Model
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2007; 188(4): 945 - 952.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
T. Mang, A. Maier, C. Plank, C. Mueller-Mang, C. Herold, and W. Schima
Pitfalls in Multi-Detector Row CT Colonography: A Systematic Approach
RadioGraphics, March 1, 2007; 27(2): 431 - 454.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
B. M. Young, J. G. Fletcher, S. R. Paulsen, F. Booya, C. D. Johnson, K. T. Johnson, Z. Melton, D. Rodysill, and J. Mandrekar
Polyp Measurement with CT Colonography: Multiple-Reader, Multiple-Workstation Comparison
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2007; 188(1): 122 - 129.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. C. Yeshwant, R. M. Summers, J. Yao, D. S. Brickman, J. R. Choi, and P. J. Pickhardt
Polyps: Linear and Volumetric Measurement at CT Colonography
Radiology, December 1, 2006; 241(3): 802 - 811.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. A. Taylor, A. Slater, S. Halligan, L. Honeyfield, M. E. Roddie, J. Demeshski, H. Amin, and D. Burling
CT Colonography: Automated Measurement of Colonic Polyps Compared with Manual Techniques--Human in Vitro Study
Radiology, December 1, 2006; 242(1): 120 - 128.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
P. J. Pickhardt, A. J. Taylor, D. H. Kim, M. Reichelderfer, D. V. Gopal, and P. R. Pfau
Screening for Colorectal Neoplasia with CT Colonography: Initial Experience from the 1st Year of Coverage by Third-Party Payers
Radiology, November 1, 2006; 241(2): 417 - 425.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2005 by the Radiological Society of North America.