Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of extracolonic findings and clinical outcomes in a screening and diagnostic CT colonography population.
Taya, Michio; McHargue, Cody; Ricci, Zina J; Flusberg, Milana; Weinstein, Stefanie; Yee, Judy.
Afiliação
  • Taya M; Department of Radiology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA. michio.taya@virginiamason.org.
  • McHargue C; Graduate Medical Education, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA. michio.taya@virginiamason.org.
  • Ricci ZJ; Department of Radiology, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA.
  • Flusberg M; Department of Radiology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA.
  • Weinstein S; Department of Radiology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA.
  • Yee J; Department of Radiology, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Abdom Radiol (NY) ; 44(2): 429-437, 2019 02.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30209542
PURPOSE: To compare the distribution of extracolonic findings and clinical outcomes between screening and diagnostic CT colonography (CTC) populations. METHODS: 388 consecutive patients (369 men, 19 women; mean ± SD age 67.8 ± 10 years) who underwent first-time CTC (4/2011-4/2017) at a Veteran's Affairs Medical Center were divided into screening (asymptomatic) or diagnostic (symptomatic) cohorts based on CTC indication. CTC reporting and data system E-scores for extracolonic findings were retrospectively assigned based on prospective CTC radiologic reports. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine the association between E-scores and CTC indication. Electronic medical records of all patients with E3 or E4 scores were reviewed (median follow-up 2.8 years) to determine clinical outcomes. RESULTS: 68% (262/388) underwent screening and 32% (126/388) diagnostic CTC. 7.2% (28/388) had extracolonic findings considered potentially significant (E4), 4.4% (17/388) had indeterminate but likely unimportant findings (E3), and 88.4% (347/388) had normal or unimportant findings (E1 or E2). E-scores were not significantly different between screening and diagnostic CTC when adjusted for age, gender, and prior imaging (p = 0.44). 4.6% (12/262) of patients with E3/E4 findings in the screening cohort demonstrated clinically significant outcomes, compared with 4.0% (5/126) in the diagnostic cohort, including a total of three extracolonic malignancies (0.8%) and three abdominal aortic aneurysms (0.8%). 4.6% (18/388) underwent follow-up imaging studies to confirm a benign outcome after detection of a category E3/E4 finding. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of extracolonic findings and clinical outcomes were not statistically significantly different between screening and diagnostic CTC populations.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Colonografia Tomográfica Computadorizada / Achados Incidentais / Aneurisma / Pneumopatias / Neoplasias Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Colonografia Tomográfica Computadorizada / Achados Incidentais / Aneurisma / Pneumopatias / Neoplasias Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article