Strategies for improving colorectal cancer detection with routine computed tomography.

PURPOSE: To report the detection rate of colorectal tumors with computed tomography (CT) performed within 1 year before diagnosis for indications other than colon abnormalities. Strategies to improve cancer detection are reported. METHODS: Two board-certified, subspecialty-trained abdominal radiologists retrospectively reviewed patient health records and CT images with knowledge of tumor location/size. Patients were classified into 3 groups: prospective (colon abnormality suggesting neoplasm documented in radiologic report), retrospective (not documented in radiologic report but detected in our retrospective review of CT images), and undetected (neither prospectively nor retrospectively detected). Retrospective detection confidence and morphologic characteristics of each tumor were also recorded. RESULTS: Of 209 included patients, 106 (50.7%) had prospectively detected tumors, 66 (31.6%) had retrospectively detected tumors, and 37 (17.7%) had undetected tumors. Asymmetric bowel wall thickening and polypoid masses were present more often in the retrospective group than in the prospective group (27% vs. 10.5% and 26% vs. 17.1%, respectively). Tumors in the ascending colon were more likely to be detected retrospectively than prospectively (odds ratio, 2.75; 95% CI 1.07-7.08; P = 0.04). Undetected tumors were smaller on average (2.9 cm) than prospective (6.0 cm) and retrospective (4.9 cm) tumors (P = 0.03). Detection confidence was lower for retrospectively detected tumors than for prospectively detected tumors (P = 0.03). Indications other than abdominal pain were most common for retrospectively detected tumors (P = 0.03). Use of intravenous contrast material was lowest in the undetected group (P = 0.003). The prospective group had more pericolonic abnormalities, regional/retroperitoneal lymph node involvement (P < 0.001), and distant metastases than did the retrospective group (P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Half of all colorectal tumors were not detected prospectively. Radiologists should perform meticulous colon tracking regardless of the indication for CT. The right colon merits additional examination. Polypoid and asymmetric morphologic characteristics were most often overlooked, but these characteristics can be learned to improve detection.

Imaging Review of Gastrointestinal Motility Disorders.

The motor function of the gastrointestinal tract relies on the enteric nervous system, which includes neurons spanning from the esophagus to the internal anal sphincter. Disorders of gastrointestinal motility arise as a result of disease within the affected portion of the enteric nervous system and may be caused by a wide array of underlying diseases. The etiology of motility disorders may be primary or due to secondary causes related to infection or inflammation, congenital abnormalities, metabolic disturbances, systemic illness, or medication-related side effects. The symptoms of gastrointestinal dysmotility tend to be nonspecific and may cause diagnostic difficulty. Therefore, evaluation of motility disorders requires a combination of clinical, radiologic, and endoscopic or manometric testing. Radiologic studies including fluoroscopy, CT, MRI, and nuclear scintigraphy allow exclusion of alternative pathologic conditions and serve as adjuncts to endoscopy and manometry to determine the appropriate diagnosis. Additionally, radiologist understanding of clinical evaluation of motility disorders is necessary for guiding referring clinicians and appropriately imaging patients. New developments and advances in imaging techniques have allowed improved assessment and diagnosis of motility disorders, which will continue to improve patient treatment options. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ©RSNA, 2022.

Radiologists Make More Errors Interpreting Off-Hours Body CT Studies during Overnight Assignments as Compared with Daytime Assignments.

Background There is increasing research attention on the impact of overnight work on radiologist performance. Prior studies on overnight imaging interpretive errors have focused on radiology residents, not on the relative performance of board-eligible or board-certified radiologists at night compared with during the day. Purpose To analyze the rate of clinically important interpretation errors on CT examinations of the abdomen, pelvis, or both ("body CT studies") committed by radiology fellows working off-hours based on day or night assignment. Materials and Methods Between July 2014 and June 2018, attending physicians at one tertiary care institution reviewed all body CT studies independently interpreted off-hours by radiologists in an academic fellowship within 10 hours of initial interpretation. Discrepancies affecting acute or follow-up clinical care were classified as errors. In this retrospective study, the error rate for studies interpreted during the day (between 7:00 am and 5:59 pm) was compared with that of studies interpreted at night (between 6:00 pm and 6:59 am). Error rate in the first half of day and night assignments was compared with error rate in the latter half. Statistical analyses used χ2 tests and general estimating equations; significance was defined as P < .05. Results There were 10 090 body CT studies interpreted by 32 radiologists. Forty-four of 2195 daytime studies (2.0%) had errors compared with 240 of 7895 nighttime studies (3.0%; P = .02). Twenty-two of 32 (69%) radiologists had higher error rates for night cases (P = .03). There were more errors in the last half of a night assignment (125 of 3358, 3.7%; P = .002) compared with the first half (115 of 4537, 2.5%). Conclusion On the basis of a subspecialty review, clinically important off-hours body CT interpretation errors occurred more frequently overnight and more frequently in the latter half of assignments, with more radiologists having worse error rates at night compared with the day. © RSNA, 2020 See also the editorial by Bruno in this issue.

CT colonography: over two decades from discovery to practice.

Since the introduction of CT colonography (CTC) in the mid-1990s, there have been continuous advancements in the examination technique and advanced visualization software for interpretation. This review will cover the origins of CTC as a natural extension of abdominal CT imaging, and discuss the evolution of CTC through the subsequent clinical phases of feasibility, validation, and implementation.

Science of health care delivery as a first step to advance undergraduate medical education: A multi-institutional collaboration.

Physicians must possess knowledge and skills to address the gaps facing the US health care system. Educators advocate for reform in undergraduate medical education (UME) to align competencies with the Triple Aim. In 2014, five medical schools and one state university began collaborating on these curricular gaps. The authors report a framework for the Science of Health Care Delivery (SHCD) using six domains and highlight curricular examples from each school. They describe three challenges and strategies for success in implementing SHCD curricula. This collaboration highlights the importance of multi-institutional partnerships to accelerate innovation and adaptation of curricula.

Science of Health Care Delivery: An Innovation in Undergraduate Medical Education to Meet Society's Needs.

The purpose of this special article is to describe a new, 4-year Science of Health Care Delivery curriculum at Mayo Clinic School of Medicine, including curricular content and structure, methods for instruction, partnership with Arizona State University, and implementation challenges. This curriculum is intended to ensure that graduating medical students enter residency prepared to train and eventually practice within person-centered, community- and population-oriented, science-driven, collaborative care teams delivering high-value care. A Science of Health Care Delivery curriculum in undergraduate medical education is necessary to successfully prepare physicians so as to ensure the best clinical outcomes and patient experience of care, at the lowest cost.

Abdominal imaging findings in gastrointestinal basidiobolomycosis.

PURPOSE: To describe the abdominal imaging findings of patients with gastrointestinal Basidiobolus ranarum infection. METHODS: A literature search was performed to compile the abdominal imaging findings of all reported worldwide cases of gastrointestinal basidiobolomycosis (GIB). In addition, a retrospective review at our institution was performed to identify GIB cases that had imaging findings. A radiologist aware of the diagnosis reviewed the imaging findings in detail. Additional information was obtained from the medical records. RESULTS: A total of 73 GIB cases have been published in the medical literature. The most common abdominal imaging findings were masses in the colon, the liver, or multiple sites and bowel wall thickening. Initially, many patients were considered to have either a neoplasm or Crohn disease. We identified 7 proven cases of GIB at our institution, of which 4 had imaging studies (4 computed tomography [CT] examinations, 4 abdominal radiographs, and an upper gastrointestinal study). Imaging studies showed abnormalities in all 4 cases. Three-fourths of our study patients had an abdominal mass at CT. Two of 3 masses involved the kidneys and included urinary obstruction. All masses showed an inflammatory component with adjacent soft tissue stranding, with or without abscess formation. CONCLUSIONS: Radiologists should consider GIB when a patient from an arid climate presents with abdominal pain, weight loss, and an inflammatory abdominal mass on CT. Abdominal masses of the colon or liver, bowel wall thickening, and abscesses are the most common imaging findings.

Reducing the radiation dose for computed tomography colonography using model-based iterative reconstruction.

PURPOSE: To determine whether radiation doses during computed tomography (CT) colonography (CTC) can be further reduced while maintaining image quality using model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR). METHODS: Twenty patients underwent CTC at a standard dose in supine and prone positions and at a reduced dose in the supine position. All other scan parameters (except noise index) were held constant. Acquisitions were reconstructed using 3 algorithms: filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and MBIR. Noise was assessed quantitatively by comparing the SD in Hounsfield units at 5 standard locations. Qualitative assessment was made by 2 experienced radiologists blinded to technique who subjectively scored image quality, noise, and sharpness (from 0 to 4). RESULTS: The standard-dose and reduced-dose CT dose index/dose-length product were 6.7/328 and 2.7 mGy/129 mGy-cm, respectively (60% reduction). Measured mean noise level increased from the standard to the reduced dose (FBP, from 58.6 to 97.2; ASIR from 35.8 to 60.6; and MBIR from 16.6 to 21.9). MBIR had significantly less noise than ASIR on 2-dimensional images at both standard and reduced doses (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Radiation dose in CTC using MBIR can be reduced by 60% while maintaining image quality and reducing image noise.

CT colonography for the detection of nonpolypoid adenomas: sensitivity assessed with restricted national CT colonography trial criteria.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of nonpolypoid adenomas and the sensitivity of CT colonography (CTC) in their detection by use of the restricted criteria of height-to-width ratio<50% and height elevation≤3 mm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the National CT Colonography Trial (American College of Radiology Imaging Network protocol 6664), a cohort of 2531 participants without symptoms underwent CTC and screening colonoscopy. The CTC examinations were interpreted with both 2D and 3D techniques. Nonpolypoid adenomatous polyps identified with CTC or colonoscopy were retrospectively reviewed to determine which polyps met the restricted criteria. The prevalence of nonpolypoid adenomas and the prospective sensitivity of CTC were determined. Descriptive statistics were used to report the prevalence, size, and histologic features. The sensitivities (with 95% CIs) for nonpolypoid and polypoid lesions were compared by two-sided Z test for independent binomial proportions. RESULTS: The retrospective review confirmed 21 nonpolypoid adenomas, yielding a prevalence of 0.83% (21 of 2531 participants). Eight (38.1%) were advanced adenomas, many (50% [4/8]) only because of large size (≥10 mm). The overall per polyp sensitivity of CTC (combined 2D and 3D interpretation) for detecting nonpolypoid adenomas≥5 mm (n=21) was 0.76; ≥6 mm (n=16), 0.75; and ≥10 mm (n=5), 0.80. These values were not statistically different from the sensitivity of detecting polypoid adenomas (p>0.37). CONCLUSION: In this large screening population, nonpolypoid adenomas had a very low prevalence (<1%), and advanced pathologic features were uncommon in polyps<10 mm in diameter. Most nonpolypoid adenomas are technically visible at CTC. The prospective sensitivity is similar to that for polypoid adenomas when the interpretation combines both 2D and 3D review.

Diaphragm disease of the small bowel: a retrospective review of CT findings.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to report the CT findings of pathologically proven diaphragm disease in the small bowel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review identified 12 patients with pathologically proven small-bowel diaphragm disease who underwent CT within 6 months of surgical resection. Two radiologists, who were unblinded to pathologic and clinical findings, evaluated CT examinations for imaging findings of disease extent, appearance, and location. Clinical history and postoperative follow-up were also performed. RESULTS: The most common presenting symptoms were abdominal pain (7/12 [58%]) and anemia (5/12 [42%]). Long-term use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs was documented in 58% (7/12) of patients. The most common location of small-bowel diaphragms was the ileum (8/12 [67%]). The CT findings were abnormal in 92% (11/12) of patients. The most common CT findings were small-bowel strictures (11/12 [92%]) and focal (median length, 1 cm) bowel wall thickening (8/12 [67%]). Other less common CT findings included mucosal hyperenhancement (6/12 [50%]), small-bowel dilatation (5/12 [42%]), and video capsule retention (6/9 [67%]). Postoperative follow-up in 11 patients found recurrent symptoms in four patients. CONCLUSION: Small-bowel diaphragm disease should be considered in patients with a history of long-term use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, chronic abdominal pain, and anemia who present with CT findings of short, symmetric ileal strictures and focal bowel wall thickening.

Noncathartic CT colonography: Image quality assessment and performance and in a screening cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Cathartic bowel preparation is a major barrier for colorectal cancer screening. We examined noncathartic CT colonography (CTC) quality and performance using four similar bowel-tagging regimens in an asymptomatic screening cohort. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This prospective study included 564 asymptomatic subjects who underwent noncathartic CTC without dietary modification but with 21 g of barium with or without iodinated oral contrast material (four regimens). The quality of tagging with oral agents was evaluated. A gastrointestinal radiologist evaluated examinations using primary 2D search supplemented by electronic cleansing (EC) and 3D problem solving. Results were compared with complete colonoscopy findings after bowel purgation and with retrospective unblinded evaluation in 556 of the 564 (99%) subjects. RESULTS: Of the 556 subjects, 7% (37/556) and 3% (16/556) of patients had 52 and 20 adenomatous polyps ≥ 6 and ≥ 10 mm, respectively. The addition of iodine significantly improved the percentage of labeled stool (p ≤ 0.0002) and specificity (80% vs 89-93%, respectively; p = 0.046). The overall sensitivity of noncathartic CTC for adenomatous polyps ≥ 6 mm was 76% (28/37; 95% CI, 59-88%), which is similar to the sensitivity of the iodinated regimens with most patients (sensitivity: 231 patients, 74% [14/19; 95% CI, 49-91%]; 229 patients, 80% [12/15; 95% CI, 52-96%]). The negative predictive value was 98% (481/490), and the lone cancer was detected (0.2%, 1/556). EC was thought to improve conspicuity of 10 of 21 visible polyps ≥ 10 mm. CONCLUSION: In this prospective study of asymptomatic subjects, the per-patient sensitivity of noncathartic CTC for detecting adenomas ≥ 6 mm was approximately 76%. Inclusion of oral iodine contrast material improves examination specificity and the percentage of labeled stool. EC may improve polyp conspicuity.

The National CT Colonography Trial: assessment of accuracy in participants 65 years of age and older.

PURPOSE: To conduct post-hoc analysis of National CT Colonography Trial data and compare the sensitivity and specificity of computed tomographic (CT) colonography in participants younger than 65 years with those in participants aged 65 years and older. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 2600 asymptomatic participants recruited at 15 centers for the trial, 497 were 65 years of age or older. Approval of this HIPAA-compliant study was obtained from the institutional review board of each site, and informed consent was obtained from each subject. Radiologists certified in CT colonography reported lesions 5 mm in diameter or larger. Screening detection of large (≥10-mm) histologically confirmed colorectal neoplasia was the primary end point; screening detection of smaller (6-9-mm) colorectal neoplasia was a secondary end point. The differences in sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography in the two age cohorts (age < 65 years and age ≥ 65 years) were estimated with bootstrap confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Complete data were available for 477 participants 65 years of age or older (among 2531 evaluable participants). Prevalence of adenomas 1 cm or larger for the older participants versus the younger participants was 6.9% (33 of 477) versus 3.7% (76 of 2054) (P < .004). For large neoplasms, mean estimates for CT colonography sensitivity and specificity among the older cohort were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.644, 0.944) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.779, 0.883), respectively. For large neoplasms in the younger group, CT colonography sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 (95% CI: 0.837, 0.967) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.816, 0.899), respectively. Per-polyp sensitivity for large neoplasms for the older and younger populations was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.578, 0.869) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.717, 0.924), respectively. For the older and younger groups, per-participant sensitivity was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.565, 0.854) and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.745, 0.882) for detecting adenomas 6 mm in diameter or larger. CONCLUSION: For most measures of diagnostic performance and in most subsets, the difference between senior-aged participants and those younger than 65 years was not statistically significant.