HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Yeshwant, S. C. Articles by Pickhardt, P. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Yeshwant, S. C. Articles by Pickhardt, P. J.

Polyps: Linear and Volumetric Measurement at CT Colonography¹

¹ From the Diagnostic Radiology Department, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bldg 10, Room 1C351, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 (S.C.Y., R.M.S., J.Y., D.S.B.); Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Md (J.R.C., P.J.P.); Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC (J.R.C.); and National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Md (P.J.P.). From the 2005 RSNA Annual Meeting. Received September 19, 2005; revision requested November 21; revision received February 23, 2006; accepted April 3; final version accepted May 10. Supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center. Address correspondence to R.M.S. (e-mail: rms{at}nih.gov).

Purpose: To retrospectively determine which of several computed tomographic (CT) colonography–based polyp measurements is most compatible with the linear measurement at optical colonoscopy and which is best for assessing change in polyp size.

Materials and Methods: This HIPAA-compliant study had institutional review board approval; informed consent was obtained. Prone and supine CT colonography with same-day optical colonoscopy was performed in 216 patients (147 men and 69 women; age range, 46–79 years; mean age, 59.2 years) with 338 polyps detected at CT colonography. Polyp size was measured with three linear measurements and two volume measurements. One linear measurement and one volume measurement were performed by using automated segmentation; remaining measurements were performed manually. Compatibility with linear size at optical colonoscopy and measurement reproducibility were assessed three ways: variation from size measurement at optical colonoscopy, change between prone and supine scans, and variability between observers. Confidence analysis assessed the ability of each measurement to identify polyps with an optical colonoscopy measurement of 1 cm or greater.

Results: Two hundred fifty-one segmentable polyps were present on both supine and prone scans. Linear polyp diameter manually measured on a three-dimensional endoluminally viewed surface (L_M3D) indicated with 95% confidence that a polyp measured as 0.8 cm or smaller was less than 1.0 cm at optical colonoscopy. Prone and supine polyp size difference was smallest for L_M3D and the linear diameter computed from manual and automated volume measurements, with interquartile ranges smaller than or equal to 0.3, 0.2, and 0.5 cm, respectively. Interobserver and intraobserver variability was smallest for linear polyp diameter measurements on a two-dimensional display, with a mean percentage difference of 2.8% (95% Bland-Altman limits of agreement: –17.8%, 23.4%) and 5.0% (95% Bland-Altman limits of agreement: –28.3%, 38.3%), respectively.

Conclusion: L_M3D best approximated polyp size measurements at optical colonoscopy. Linear diameter calculated from automated volume measurements showed the smallest variation between supine and prone scans while avoiding observer variability and may be best for assessing polyp size changes with serial examinations.

© RSNA, 2006

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. P. Whitlock, J. S. Lin, E. Liles, T. L. Beil, and R. Fu Screening for Colorectal Cancer: A Targeted, Updated Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Ann Intern Med, November 4, 2008; 149(9): 638 - 658. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. M. Summers, L. R. Handwerker, P. J. Pickhardt, R. L. Van Uitert, K. K. Deshpande, S. Yeshwant, J. Yao, and M. Franaszek Performance of a Previously Validated CT Colonography Computer-Aided Detection System in a New Patient Population Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2008; 191(1): 168 - 174. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				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]