Virtual tagging for laxative-free CT colonography: pilot evaluation.

Laxative-free computed tomographic colonography (lfCTC) could significantly improve patient adherence to colorectal screening. However, the interpretation of lfCTC data is complicated by the presence of poorly tagged feces and partial-volume artifacts that imitate colorectal lesions. The authors developed a method for virtual tagging of such artifacts. A probabilistic model of colonic wall was developed, and virtual tagging was performed on artifacts that were identified by the model. The method was evaluated with 46 clinical lfCTC cases that were prepared with dietary fecal tagging only. Visual examples show that the method can label partial-volume artifacts, poorly tagged feces, nonadhering completely untagged feces, and artifacts such as rectal tubes. The effect of virtual tagging was evaluated by comparing the detection accuracy of a fully automated polyp detection scheme without and with the method. With virtual tagging, the per-lesion detection sensitivity was 100% for lesions > or = 10 mm (n = 4) with 3.8 false positives per patient (per two CT scan volumes) and 90% for lesions > or = 6 mm (n = 10) with 5.4 false positives per patient on average. The improvement in detection performance by virtual tagging was statistically significant (p = 0.03; JAFROC and JAFROC-1).

[1]  Armando Manduca,et al.  Noncathartic CT colonography with stool tagging: performance with and without electronic stool subtraction. , 2008, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[2]  A. Zauber,et al.  Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. , 1993 .

[3]  Hiroyuki Yoshida,et al.  Structure-analysis method for electronic cleansing in cathartic and noncathartic CT colonography. , 2008, Medical physics.

[4]  Paul J Limburg,et al.  Assessing attitudes toward laxative preparation in colorectal cancer screening and effects on future testing: potential receptivity to computed tomographic colonography. , 2007, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[5]  C. D'Orsi,et al.  Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  Hans Frimmel,et al.  Centerline-based colon segmentation for CT colonography. , 2005, Medical physics.

[7]  Hiroyuki Yoshida,et al.  Adaptive correction of the pseudo-enhancement of CT attenuation for fecal-tagging CT colonography , 2008, Medical Image Anal..

[8]  Hiroyuki Yoshida,et al.  Automated Segmentation of Colonic Walls for Computerized Detection of Polyps in CT Colonography , 2001, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[9]  Perry J Pickhardt,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 * † , 2008, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[10]  Dev P Chakraborty,et al.  Observer studies involving detection and localization: modeling, analysis, and validation. , 2004, Medical physics.

[11]  Hiroyuki Yoshida,et al.  Fully automated three-dimensional detection of polyps in fecal-tagging CT colonography. , 2007, Academic radiology.

[12]  Hiroyuki Yoshida,et al.  CAD in CT colonography without and with oral contrast agents: Progress and challenges , 2007, Comput. Medical Imaging Graph..

[13]  Hiroyuki Yoshida,et al.  Three-dimensional computer-aided diagnosis scheme for detection of colonic polyps , 2001, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[14]  M. Zalis,et al.  Tagging-based, electronically cleansed CT colonography: evaluation of patient comfort and image readability. , 2006, Radiology.

[15]  Dev P Chakraborty,et al.  Analysis of location specific observer performance data: validated extensions of the jackknife free-response (JAFROC) method. , 2006, Academic radiology.

[16]  K. Berbaum,et al.  Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis. Generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. , 1992, Investigative radiology.

[17]  Robert J. Wentz,et al.  Development of a cathartic-free colorectal cancer screening test using virtual colonoscopy: a feasibility study. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[18]  J G Fletcher,et al.  CT colonography without cathartic preparation: feasibility study. , 2001, Radiology.

[19]  Nancy Breen,et al.  Patterns of Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake among Men and Women in the United States , 2006, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[20]  Stuart A. Taylor,et al.  Computed tomographic colonography: assessment of radiologist performance with and without computer-aided detection. , 2006, Gastroenterology.

[21]  Michael Macari,et al.  CT colonography: where have we been and where are we going? , 2005, Radiology.

[22]  David H. Kim,et al.  CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[23]  Karen M Horton,et al.  Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  Hiroyuki Yoshida,et al.  Feature-guided analysis for reduction of false positives in CAD of polyps for computed tomographic colonography. , 2003, Medical physics.

[25]  Dev P Chakraborty,et al.  Validation and statistical power comparison of methods for analyzing free-response observer performance studies. , 2008, Academic radiology.

[26]  Philippe Lefere,et al.  Laxative-free CT colonography. , 2004, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[27]  P. Pickhardt,et al.  Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  Philippe Lefere,et al.  CT colonography after fecal tagging with a reduced cathartic cleansing and a reduced volume of barium. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[29]  M. Prokop,et al.  Spiral and multislice computed tomography of the body , 2003 .