Academic Radiology
Volume 16, Issue 7 , Pages 780-789, July 2009

Full-laxative Versus Minimum-laxative Fecal-tagging CT Colonography Using 64-detector Row CT:

Prospective Blinded Comparison of Diagnostic Performance, Tagging Quality, and Patient Acceptance

Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 25 New Chardon St., Suite 400C, MA 02114 (K.N., H.Y.); Department of Radiology, Tokyo-West Tokushukai Hospital, Tokyo, Japan (T.O., A.H.); Digestive Disease Center, Showa University Northern Yokohama Hospital, Yokohama, Japan (S.E., S.K.)

Received 25 November 2008; accepted 30 December 2008. published online 20 April 2009.

Rationale and Objectives

To compare prospectively 64-detector-row computed tomographic colonography (CTC) after a full-laxative tagging-based preparation (full preparation) with a minimum-laxative tagging-based preparation (minimum preparation) with respect to diagnostic performance in the detection of polyps, tagging quality, and patient acceptance.

Materials and Methods

Consecutive 101 patients at high risk for developing colorectal cancer were alternately assigned to either a full preparation group (n = 51) or a minimum preparation group (n = 50) for fecal-tagging CTC. The full preparation consisted of administration of 2-L polyethylene glycol solution with 20 mL of sodium diatrizoate for fecal tagging. The minimum preparation consisted of ingestion of a total of 45 mL of sodium diatrizoate during the 3 days before and 10 mL of sodium picosulfate solution the night before CT. Colonoscopy was used as the reference standard. We assessed the accuracy of polyp detection and the tagging quality for each preparation. All patients were given questionnaires related to their acceptance.

Results

Per-patient sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for polyps ≥ 6 mm were as follows: full preparation group, 97%, 92%, 88%, and 98%, respectively; minimum preparation group, 88%, 68%, 56%, and 92%, respectively. Average visual subjective tagging scores for the full and minimum preparation groups were 94.6% and 76.1%, respectively (P < .0001). Minimum preparation was better tolerated than full preparation.

Conclusion

Although full-laxative and minimum-laxative fecal-tagging CTC yielded an equally high sensitivity in the detection of polyps ≥ 6 mm, the full-laxative fecal-tagging CTC yielded a better specificity than did the minimum-laxative fecal-tagging CTC. Thus, it is desirable to offer patients an option of either full-laxative fecal-tagging CTC for highest diagnostic accuracy and ability to perform a same-day therapeutic colonoscopy without additional bowel preparation, or minimum-laxative fecal-tagging CTC for those unwilling to undergo full preparation but willing to accept moderate decrease in specificity.

Key Words: Colorectal neoplasms, bowel preparation, fecal tagging, computed tomography, colonography

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1076-6332(09)00008-7

doi:10.1016/j.acra.2008.12.027

Academic Radiology
Volume 16, Issue 7 , Pages 780-789, July 2009