Primary Three-Dimensional Analysis with Perspective-Filet View Versus Primary Two-Dimensional Analysis: Evaluation of Lesion Detection by Inexperienced Readers at Computed Tomographic Colonography in Symptomatic Patients

References

• Taylor SA, Laghi A, Lefere P, Halligan S, Stoker J. European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR): consensus statement on CT colonography. Eur Radiol 2007; 17: 575–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, Smith RA, Brooks D, Andrews KS, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 20 08: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin 2008; 58: 130–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silva AC, Wellnitz CV, Hara AK. Three-dimensional virtual dissection at CT colonography: unraveling the colon to search for lesions. Radiographics 2006; 26: 1669–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juchems MS, Fleiter TR, Pauls S, Schmidt SA, Brambs HJ, Aschoff AJ. CT colonography: comparison of a colon dissection display versus 3D endoluminal view for the detection of polyps. Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 68–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrascosa P, Capuñay C, López EM, Ulla M, Castiglioni R, Carrascosa J. Multidetector CT colonoscopy: evaluation of the perspective-filet view virtual colon dissection technique for the detection of elevated lesions. Abdom Imaging 2007; 32: 582–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kim SH, Lee JM, Eun HW, Lee MW, Han JK, Lee JY, et al. Two- versus three-dimensional colon evaluation with recently developed virtual dissection software for CT colonography. Radiology 2007; 244: 852–64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson CD, Fletcher JG, MacCarthy RL, Mandrekar JN, Harmsen WS, Limburg PJ, et al. Effect of slice thickness and primary 2D versus 3D virtual dissection on colorectal lesion detection at CT colonography in 452 asymptomatic adults. Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189: 672–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoppe H, Quattropani C, Spreng A, Mattich J, Netzer P, Dinkel HP. Virtual colon dissection with CT-colonography compared with axial interpretation and conventional colonoscopy: preliminary results. Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182: 1151–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burling D, Moore A, Taylor S, La Porte S, Marshall M. Virtual colonoscopy training and accreditation: a national survey of radiologist experience and attitudes in the UK. Clin Radiol 2007; 62: 651–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisichella V, Hellström M. Availability, indications, and technical performance of computed tomographic colonography: a national survey. Acta Radiol 2006; 47: 231–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fidler JL, Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Huprich JE, Barlow JM, Earnest F 4th, et al. Understanding interpretative errors in radiologists learning computed tomography colonography. Acad Radiol 2004; 11: 750–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slater A, Taylor SA, Tam E, Gartner L, Scarth J, Peiris C, et al. Reading errors during CT colonography: causes and implications for training. Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 2275–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaulieu CF, Jeffrey RB, Jr, Karadi C, Paik DS, Napel S. Display modes for CT colonography. Part II. Blinded comparison of axial CT and virtual endoscopic and panoramic endoscopic volume-rendered studies. Radiology 1999; 212: 203–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickhardt PJ. Screening CT colonography: how I do it. Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189: 290–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, Butler JA, Puckett ML, Hildebrandt HA, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 2191–200
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svensson MH, Svensson E, Hellström M. Bowel wall visualisation at CT-colonography. Acta Radiol 2002; 43: 87–95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burling D, Halligan S, Atchley J, Dhingsar R, Guest P, Hayward S, et al. CT-colonography: interpretative performance in a non-academic environment. Clin Radiol 2007; 62: 424–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Park SH, Lee SS, Choi EK, Kim SY, Yang SK, Kim JH, et al. Flat colorectal neoplasms: definition, importance, and visualization on CT colonography. Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188: 953–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor SA, Halligan S, Burling D, Morley S, Bassett P, Atkin W, et al. CT colonography: effect of experience and training on reader performance. Eur Radiol 2004; 14: 1025–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mang T, Peloschek P, Plank C, Maier A, Graser A, Weber M, et al. Effect of computer-aided detection as a second reader in multidetector-row CT colonography. Eur Radiol 2007; 17: 2598–607
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker ME, Bogoni L, Obuchowski NA, Dass C, Kendzierski RM, Remer EM, et al. Computer-aided detection of colorectal polyps: can it improve sensitivities of less-experienced readers? Preliminary findings. Radiology 2007; 245: 140–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halligan S, Altman DG, Mallett S, Taylor SA, Burling D, Roddie M, et al. Computed tomographic colonography: assessment of radiologist performance with and without computer-aided detection. Gastroenterology 2006; 131: 1690–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson KT, Johnson CD, Fletcher JG, MacCarty RL, Summers RL. CT colonography using 360° virtual dissection: a feasibility study. Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186: 90–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Gopal DV. Surface visualisation at 3D endoluminal CT colonography: degree of coverage and implications for polyp detection. Gastroenterology 2006; 130: 1582–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar