Flat colorectal lesions in asymptomatic adults: implications for screening with CT virtual colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVE The clinical significance of flat lesions in colorectal cancer screening remains uncertain. The purpose of this study was to investigate the frequency, histology, and virtual colonoscopy detection of flat lesions in an asymptomatic screening population. SUBJECTS AND METHODS The morphology of all detected polyps was prospectively recorded as flat or polypoid (sessile or pedunculated) in 1,233 consecutive asymptomatic adults who underwent same-day virtual colonoscopy and optical colonoscopy. A flat morphology was defined as a shallow plaquelike broad-based lesion with a height of less than one half of its width. RESULTS Of 344 polyps of 6 mm or greater confirmed at optical colonoscopy, 17 (4.9%) were labeled as flat at both virtual colonoscopy and optical colonoscopy; 17 (4.9%), at optical colonoscopy only; and 25 (7.3%), at virtual colonoscopy only, yielding 59 total lesions in 52 (4.2%) of 1,233 patients. Twenty-nine (49.2%) of 59 flat lesions were adenomatous, of which four measured 10 mm or greater and one 6- to 9-mm lesion was histologically advanced. None of the 148 diminutive flat lesions (< or = 5 mm) detected at optical colonoscopy was histologically advanced. Virtual colonoscopy prospectively detected 24 (82.8%) of 29 flat adenomas and 47 (80.0%) of all 59 flat lesions 6 mm or greater. In comparison, the sensitivity of virtual colonoscopy for the detection of polypoid adenomas and all polypoid lesions of 6 mm or greater was 86.2% (156/181, p = 0.58) and 81.0% (231/285, p = 0.86), respectively. CONCLUSION Flat adenomas measuring 6 mm or greater are uncommon in a typical Western screening population, and advanced flat neoplasms are rare. The sensitivity of virtual colonoscopy for detecting flat lesions was similar to that of polypoid lesions. These results indicate that flat lesions are not a significant drawback for virtual colonoscopy screening.

[1]  R. Markert,et al.  Is in vivo measurement of size of polyps during colonoscopy accurate? , 1996, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

[2]  Perry J Pickhardt,et al.  Linear polyp measurement at CT colonography: in vitro and in vivo comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional displays. , 2005, Radiology.

[3]  T. Muto,et al.  Small “flat adenoma” of the large bowel with special reference to its clinicopathologic features , 1985, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[4]  Y Morioka,et al.  Clinicopathologic features of the flat adenoma , 1991, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

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

[6]  J. Bond Doubling time of flat and polypoid colorectal neoplasms: defining the adenoma–carcinoma sequence , 2000, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[7]  Stuart A. Taylor,et al.  The Role of CT Colonography in Colorectal Cancer Screening , 2005, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[8]  T. Fujii,et al.  Flat and depressed colonic neoplasms: a prospective study of 1000 colonoscopies in the UK , 2000, The Lancet.

[9]  K. Togashi,et al.  Flat and depressed lesions of the colon and rectum: Pathogenesis and clinical management. , 2003, Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore.

[10]  J F Mayberry,et al.  Flat adenomas exist in asymptomatic people: important implications for colorectal cancer screening programmes , 1998, Gut.

[11]  Perry J Pickhardt,et al.  Electronic cleansing and stool tagging in CT colonography: advantages and pitfalls with primary three-dimensional evaluation. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[12]  A. Zauber,et al.  The advanced adenoma as the primary target of screening. , 2002, Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America.

[13]  H Mitooka,et al.  Flat neoplasms in the adenoma-carcinoma sequence in Japan. , 2000, Seminars in gastrointestinal disease.

[14]  M. Vatn,et al.  Growth of colorectal polyps: redetection and evaluation of unresected polyps for a period of three years. , 1996, Gut.

[15]  D. Owen,et al.  Flat adenomas of the colon. , 1991, Human pathology.

[16]  J. Stoker,et al.  Colonography by computed tomography , 2005, European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology.

[17]  Alvin C. Silva,et al.  CT colonography with intravenous contrast material: varied appearances of colorectal carcinoma. , 2005, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[18]  T. Smyrk,et al.  Epidemiologic characteristics of the flat adenoma of muto , 1992, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[19]  A. Hara,et al.  Detection of flat lesions in the colon with CT colonography , 2002, Abdominal Imaging.

[20]  J. Bond Clinical Relevance of the Small Colorectal Polyp , 2001, Endoscopy.

[21]  Taizo Kimura,et al.  Nonpolypoid adenomas and adenocarcinomas found in background mucosa of surgically resected colons , 1996, Cancer.

[22]  Perry J Pickhardt By-patient performance characteristics of CT colonography: importance of polyp size threshold data. , 2003, Radiology.

[23]  Perry J Pickhardt,et al.  Translucency rendering in 3D endoluminal CT colonography: a useful tool for increasing polyp specificity and decreasing interpretation time. , 2004, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[24]  Bond Jh Clinical relevance of the small colorectal polyp. , 2001 .

[25]  J. Saurin,et al.  [Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults]. , 2004, Gastroenterologie clinique et biologique.

[26]  C. Johnson,et al.  Prospective blinded evaluation of computed tomographic colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps. , 2003, Gastroenterology.

[27]  M. Vatn,et al.  Growth of colorectal polyps: recovery and evaluation of unresected polyps of less than 10 mm, 1 year after detection. , 1994, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology.

[28]  Ann G Zauber,et al.  On finding flat adenomas: is the search worth the gain? , 2002, Gastroenterology.

[29]  A. Zauber,et al.  Blinded assessment of the flat adenoma in the national polyp study (NPS) does not demonstrate an excess risk for high grade dysplasia initially or for advanced adenomas at surveillance , 2001 .