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


     


DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2441061122
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 Doshi, T.
Right arrow Articles by Dachman, A. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Doshi, T.
Right arrow Articles by Dachman, A. H.
(Radiology 2007;244:165-173.)
© RSNA, 2007


Gastrointestinal Imaging

CT Colonography: False-Negative Interpretations1

Taral Doshi, BS, David Rusinak, MD, Robert A. Halvorsen, MD, FACR, Don C. Rockey, MD, Kenji Suzuki, PhD, and Abraham H. Dachman, MD

1 From the Department of Radiology, University of Chicago, Department of Radiology, MC 2026, 5841 S Maryland Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 (T.D., D.R., K.S., A.H.D.), Department of Radiology, Medical College of Virginia–Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Va (R.A.H.); and Division of Digestive and Liver Disease, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (D.C.R.). From the 2006 RSNA Annual Meeting. Received June 28, 2006; revision requested August 30; revision received October 6; accepted November 2; final version accepted December 15. Supported by the University of Chicago Department of Radiology Research Fund. Address correspondence to A.H.D. (e-mail: ahdachma{at}uchicago.edu).

Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate if false-negative interpretations at computed tomographic (CT) colonography are due to observer error.

Materials and Methods: This study was HIPAA compliant and had institutional review board approval, with waiver of informed consent. An initial unblinded review of CT colonographic image data was used to generate reconciliation reports for all false-negative polyp candidates 6.0 mm or larger. These findings were then verified by two experienced readers. After reports from the original study and reconciliation reports were reviewed, errors were classified as observer (measurement or perceptual) errors, technical errors (eg, those caused by insufficient distention, fluid), or not reconcilable. Per-polyp and per-patient sensitivity values were calculated for adenomas 6.0 mm or larger in the original data set and again by assuming elimination of technical and observer errors.

Results: Of the original data set of 228 available polyps, 147 were adenomas; for this subgroup, the per-patient sensitivity was 70% and 68% at 10.0- and 6.0-mm thresholds, respectively. When all histologic types were considered, 114 polyps were false-negative findings. Of these, 53% (60 of 114) were attributed to observer-related errors, and 26% were attributed to errors classified as technical. After detailed retrospective reconciliation of individual polyps (so as to exclude any potentially correctable observer error), the per-polyp sensitivity of CT colonography for adenomas 10.0 mm or larger increased to 93%, and the per-patient sensitivity increased to 91%. When observer and technical errors were accounted for, eight (5.4%) of 147 adenomas 6.0 mm or larger could not be detected. If all technical errors and observer errors were scored as true-positive findings, the sensitivity for adenomas 6.0 mm or larger would have been 95% on both a per-polyp and a per-patient basis.

Conclusion: The major contributor to error at CT colonography was observer perceptual error, while observer measurement error played a smaller role.

© RSNA, 2007




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
P. J. Pickhardt and A. H. Dachman
Missed Lesions at Primary 2D CT Colonography: Further Support for 3D Polyp Detection
Radiology, February 1, 2008; 246(2): 648 - 649.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
P. J. Pickhardt, A. D. Lee, A. J. Taylor, S. J. Michel, T. C. Winter, A. Shadid, R. J. Meiners, P. J. Chase, J. L. Hinshaw, J. G. Williams, et al.
Primary 2D Versus Primary 3D Polyp Detection at Screening CT Colonography
Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2007; 189(6): 1451 - 1456.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2007 by the Radiological Society of North America.