Seminars in Roentgenology
Volume 44, Issue 3 , Pages 191-195 , July 2009

Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Colonography Versus Optical Colonoscopy: A Critically Appraised Topic

  • Robert El-Maraghi

      Affiliations

    • Department of Internal Medicine, Royal Victoria Hospital of Barrie, Barrie, ON, Canada
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests to Robert El-Maraghi, MD, Department of Internal Medicine, Royal Victoria Hospital of Barrie, 201 Georgian Drive, Barrie, ON, Canada L4M 6M2
    • ,
  • Ania Kielar

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada

References 

  1. Rabeneck L. Population-based colorectal cancer screening: An overview of Ontario's program. Oncol Exchange. 2007;6:25–27
  2. Bond JH. Clinical relevance of the small colorectal polyp. Endoscopy. 2001;33:454–457
  3. Staunton M. Evidence-based radiology: Steps 1 and 2—asking answerable questions and searching for evidence. Radiology. 2007;242:23–31
  4. Haynes RB. Of studies, summaries, synopses, and systems: The “4S” evolution of services for finding current best evidence. Evidence Based Ment Health. 2001;4:37–39
  5. Florie J, van Gelder RE, Schutter MP, et al. Feasibility study of computed tomography colonography using limited bowel preparation at normal and low-dose levels study. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:3112–3122
  6. National Health Service Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations. England: Oxford University; 2001;http://www.cebm.net/levels_of_evidence.aspAccessed: August 15, 2008
  7. Dodd JD. Evidence-based practice in radiology: Steps 3 and 4—appraise and apply diagnostic radiology literature. Radiology. 2007;242:342–354
  8. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. Detection of colorectal lesions: Lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy. Radiology. 2003;229:775–781
  9. Cohnen M, Vogt C, Beck A, et al. Feasibility of MDCT colonography in ultra-low-dose technique in the detection of colorectal lesions: Comparison with high-resolution video colonoscopy. Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183:1355–1359
  10. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:1300–1311
  11. Iannaccone R, Catalano C, Mangiapane F, et al. Colorectal polyps: Detection with low-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography versus two sequential colonoscopies. Radiology. 2005;237:927–937
  12. Vogt C, Cohnen M, Beck A, et al. Detection of colorectal polyps by multislice CT colonography with ultra-low-dose technique: Comparison with high-resolution videocolonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;60:201–209
  13. MacEneaney PM, Malone DE. The meaning of diagnostic test results: A spreadsheet for swift data analysis. Clin Radiol. 2000;55:227–235
  14. van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Serlie IWO, et al. CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: Feasibility of dose reduction. Radiology. 2002;224:25–33
  15. Huda W. Radiation dosimetry in diagnostic radiology. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:1487–1488
  16. Wise KN. Solid cancer risks from radiation exposure for the Australian population. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2003;26:53–62

PII: S0037-198X(09)00025-X

doi: 10.1053/j.ro.2009.03.008

Seminars in Roentgenology
Volume 44, Issue 3 , Pages 191-195 , July 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution