Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Abdominal Radiology 1/2015

01-01-2015

Automated volumetric analysis for comparison of oral sulfate solution (SUPREP) with established cathartic agents at CT colonography

Authors: Peter Bannas, Joshua Bakke, James L. Patrick, Perry J. Pickhardt

Published in: Abdominal Radiology | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To objectively compare residual colonic fluid volume and attenuation of oral sulfate solution (OSS) with four different established cathartic regimens using an automated volumetric software tool at CT colonography (CTC).

Methods

This HIPAA-compliant study had institutional review board approval. Volumetric analysis of residual contrast-tagged colonic fluid was performed on CTC studies in 263 adults (mean age 60.1 years; 137M/126F) using an automated volumetric software tool. Twenty-three patients receiving 177 mL OSS (SUPREP; single-bottle purgation) were compared with 60 patients each receiving 45 mL sodium phosphate (NaP), 90 mL NaP (2× NaP), 592 mL (two bottles) magnesium citrate (MgC), and 4,000 mL polyethylene glycol (PEG). All patients received oral contrast cleansing after catharsis. Data were analyzed with unpaired t test with Welch correction and F test.

Results

The mean volume of residual colonic fluid was less with OSS (125 ± 60 mL) than for established cathartic agents: 2× NaP (206 ± 125 mL, P < 0.0001), MgC (184 ± 125 mL, P < 0.01), PEG (166 ± 114 mL, P < 0.05), and NaP (165 ± 135 mL, P = 0.067). Variance of volumes was also significantly lower for OSS (range 28–251 mL) than for established agents (range 4–853 mL) (all P < 0.01). Mean fluid attenuation was higher with OSS (956 ± 168 HU) than for established agents (all P < 0.05): 2× NaP (455 ± 191 HU), MgC (691 ± 154 HU), NaP (779 ± 127 HU), and PEG (843 ± 193 HU).

Conclusions

Automated volumetry allows rapid objective assessment of bowel preparation quality at CTC. Purgation with the novel oral sulfate solution (SUPREP) consistently resulted in less residual colonic fluid and higher fluid attenuation compared with established cathartic regimens.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, et al. (2007) CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med 357(14):1403–1412CrossRefPubMed Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, et al. (2007) CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med 357(14):1403–1412CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Laghi A, et al. (2007) Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with computed tomography colonography—the impact of not reporting diminutive lesions. Cancer 109(11):2213–2221CrossRefPubMed Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Laghi A, et al. (2007) Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with computed tomography colonography—the impact of not reporting diminutive lesions. Cancer 109(11):2213–2221CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Hassan C, Pickhardt P, Laghi A, et al. (2008) Computed tomographic colonography to screen for colorectal cancer, extracolonic cancer, and aortic aneurysm. Arch Intern Med 168(7):696–705CrossRefPubMed Hassan C, Pickhardt P, Laghi A, et al. (2008) Computed tomographic colonography to screen for colorectal cancer, extracolonic cancer, and aortic aneurysm. Arch Intern Med 168(7):696–705CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. (2003) Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 349(23):2191–2200CrossRefPubMed Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. (2003) Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 349(23):2191–2200CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, et al. (2008) Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med 359(12):1207–1217CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, et al. (2008) Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med 359(12):1207–1217CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
6.
go back to reference Seeff LC, Manninen DL, Dong FB, et al. (2004) Is there endoscopic capacity to provide colorectal cancer screening to the unscreened population in the United States? Gastroenterology 127(6):1661–1669CrossRefPubMed Seeff LC, Manninen DL, Dong FB, et al. (2004) Is there endoscopic capacity to provide colorectal cancer screening to the unscreened population in the United States? Gastroenterology 127(6):1661–1669CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Force USPST (2008) Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 149(9):627–637CrossRef Force USPST (2008) Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 149(9):627–637CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Beebe TJ, Johnson CD, Stoner SM, Anderson KJ, Limburg PJ (2007) Assessing attitudes toward laxative preparation in colorectal cancer screening and effects on future testing: potential receptivity to computed tomographic colonography. Mayo Clin Proc 82(6):666–671. doi:10.4065/82.6.666 CrossRefPubMed Beebe TJ, Johnson CD, Stoner SM, Anderson KJ, Limburg PJ (2007) Assessing attitudes toward laxative preparation in colorectal cancer screening and effects on future testing: potential receptivity to computed tomographic colonography. Mayo Clin Proc 82(6):666–671. doi:10.​4065/​82.​6.​666 CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Pickhardt PJ (2007) Colonic preparation for computed tomographic colonography: understanding the relative advantages and disadvantages of a noncathartic approach. Mayo Clin Proc 82(6):659–661CrossRefPubMed Pickhardt PJ (2007) Colonic preparation for computed tomographic colonography: understanding the relative advantages and disadvantages of a noncathartic approach. Mayo Clin Proc 82(6):659–661CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH (2010) CT colonography: principles and practice of virtual colonoscopy. Philadelphia: SaundersCrossRef Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH (2010) CT colonography: principles and practice of virtual colonoscopy. Philadelphia: SaundersCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Hinshaw JL, et al. (2007) Prospective blinded trial comparing 45-mL and 90-mL doses of oral sodium phosphate for bowel preparation before computed tomographic colonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 31(1):53–58CrossRefPubMed Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Hinshaw JL, et al. (2007) Prospective blinded trial comparing 45-mL and 90-mL doses of oral sodium phosphate for bowel preparation before computed tomographic colonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 31(1):53–58CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Berkelhammer C, Ekambaram A, Silva RG (2002) Low-volume oral colonoscopy bowel preparation: sodium phosphate and magnesium citrate. Gastrointest Endosc 56(1):89–94CrossRefPubMed Berkelhammer C, Ekambaram A, Silva RG (2002) Low-volume oral colonoscopy bowel preparation: sodium phosphate and magnesium citrate. Gastrointest Endosc 56(1):89–94CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Markowitz GS, Stokes MB, Radhakrishnan J, D’Agati VD (2005) Acute phosphate nephropathy following oral sodium phosphate bowel purgative: an underrecognized cause of chronic renal failure. J Am Soc Nephrol 16(11):3389–3396CrossRefPubMed Markowitz GS, Stokes MB, Radhakrishnan J, D’Agati VD (2005) Acute phosphate nephropathy following oral sodium phosphate bowel purgative: an underrecognized cause of chronic renal failure. J Am Soc Nephrol 16(11):3389–3396CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Borden ZS, Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, et al. (2010) Bowel preparation for CT colonography: blinded comparison of magnesium citrate and sodium phosphate for catharsis. Radiology 254(1):138–144CrossRefPubMed Borden ZS, Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, et al. (2010) Bowel preparation for CT colonography: blinded comparison of magnesium citrate and sodium phosphate for catharsis. Radiology 254(1):138–144CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Macari M, Lavelle M, Pedrosa I, et al. (2001) Effect of different bowel preparations on residual fluid at CT colonography. Radiology 218(1):274–277CrossRefPubMed Macari M, Lavelle M, Pedrosa I, et al. (2001) Effect of different bowel preparations on residual fluid at CT colonography. Radiology 218(1):274–277CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Vanner SJ, MacDonald PH, Paterson WG, et al. (1990) A randomized prospective trial comparing oral sodium phosphate with standard polyethylene glycol-based lavage solution (Golytely) in the preparation of patients for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 85(4):422–427PubMed Vanner SJ, MacDonald PH, Paterson WG, et al. (1990) A randomized prospective trial comparing oral sodium phosphate with standard polyethylene glycol-based lavage solution (Golytely) in the preparation of patients for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 85(4):422–427PubMed
22.
go back to reference Di Palma JA, Rodriguez R, McGowan J, Cleveland M (2009) A randomized clinical study evaluating the safety and efficacy of a new, reduced-volume, oral sulfate colon-cleansing preparation for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 104(9):2275–2284. doi:10.1038/ajg.2009.389 CrossRefPubMed Di Palma JA, Rodriguez R, McGowan J, Cleveland M (2009) A randomized clinical study evaluating the safety and efficacy of a new, reduced-volume, oral sulfate colon-cleansing preparation for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 104(9):2275–2284. doi:10.​1038/​ajg.​2009.​389 CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Rex DK, Di Palma JA, Rodriguez R, McGowan J, Cleveland M (2010) A randomized clinical study comparing reduced-volume oral sulfate solution with standard 4-liter sulfate-free electrolyte lavage solution as preparation for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 72(2):328–336. doi:10.1016/j.gie.2010.03.1054 CrossRefPubMed Rex DK, Di Palma JA, Rodriguez R, McGowan J, Cleveland M (2010) A randomized clinical study comparing reduced-volume oral sulfate solution with standard 4-liter sulfate-free electrolyte lavage solution as preparation for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 72(2):328–336. doi:10.​1016/​j.​gie.​2010.​03.​1054 CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Cohen SM, Wexner SD, Binderow SR, et al. (1994) Prospective, randomized, endoscopic-blinded trial comparing precolonoscopy bowel cleansing methods. Dis Colon Rectum 37(7):689–696CrossRefPubMed Cohen SM, Wexner SD, Binderow SR, et al. (1994) Prospective, randomized, endoscopic-blinded trial comparing precolonoscopy bowel cleansing methods. Dis Colon Rectum 37(7):689–696CrossRefPubMed
25.
26.
go back to reference Pickhardt PJ, Choi JHR (2003) Electronic cleansing and stool tagging in CT colonography: advantages and pitfalls with primary three-dimensional evaluation. Am J Roentgenol 181(3):799–805CrossRef Pickhardt PJ, Choi JHR (2003) Electronic cleansing and stool tagging in CT colonography: advantages and pitfalls with primary three-dimensional evaluation. Am J Roentgenol 181(3):799–805CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Slater A, Taylor SA, Burling D, et al. (2006) Colonic polyps: effect of attenuation of tagged fluid and viewing window on conspicuity and measurement—in vitro experiment with porcine colonic specimen. Radiology 240(1):101–109. doi:10.1148/radiol.2401050984 CrossRefPubMed Slater A, Taylor SA, Burling D, et al. (2006) Colonic polyps: effect of attenuation of tagged fluid and viewing window on conspicuity and measurement—in vitro experiment with porcine colonic specimen. Radiology 240(1):101–109. doi:10.​1148/​radiol.​2401050984 CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Deshpande KK, Summers RM, Van Uitert RL, et al. (2007) Quality assessment for CT colonography: validation of automated measurement of colonic distention and residual fluid. Am J Roentgenol 189(6):1457–1463CrossRef Deshpande KK, Summers RM, Van Uitert RL, et al. (2007) Quality assessment for CT colonography: validation of automated measurement of colonic distention and residual fluid. Am J Roentgenol 189(6):1457–1463CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Van Uitert RL, Summers RM, White JM, et al. (2008) Temporal and multiinstitutional quality assessment of CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191(5):1503–1508CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Van Uitert RL, Summers RM, White JM, et al. (2008) Temporal and multiinstitutional quality assessment of CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191(5):1503–1508CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
31.
go back to reference Park SH, Ha HK, Kim MJ, et al. (2005) False-negative results at multi-detector row CT colonography: multivariate analysis of causes for missed lesions. Radiology 235(2):495–502CrossRefPubMed Park SH, Ha HK, Kim MJ, et al. (2005) False-negative results at multi-detector row CT colonography: multivariate analysis of causes for missed lesions. Radiology 235(2):495–502CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Automated volumetric analysis for comparison of oral sulfate solution (SUPREP) with established cathartic agents at CT colonography
Authors
Peter Bannas
Joshua Bakke
James L. Patrick
Perry J. Pickhardt
Publication date
01-01-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Abdominal Radiology / Issue 1/2015
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Electronic ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0186-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Abdominal Radiology 1/2015 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.