Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Abdominal Radiology 6/2015

01-08-2015

Optimal section thickness for detection of polyps at MR: resolution phantom study

Authors: Courtney C. Moreno, Pardeep K. Mittal, Nicholas L. Henson, Deborah A. Baumgarten, Lauren F. Alexander, Timothy S. Hanes, William C. Small, Hiroumi D. Kitajima, Jian Kang, John R. Votaw, John N. Oshinski, W. Thomas Dixon

Published in: Abdominal Radiology | Issue 6/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To determine (1) the sensitivity for detection of small polyps with varying MR slice thicknesses using a resolution phantom; (2) reader confidence in polyp detection; and (3) image acquisition time.

Methods

A resolution phantom was created using a 3D printer. Polyp morphologies were sessile (height = diameter), flat (height = 1/2 diameter of the base), and pedunculated (stalk length = polyp diameter). Polyp diameters were 5, 7, 10, and 12 mm. Images were acquired with section thicknesses of 5, 3, and 1 mm. Images were independently reviewed by 4 board-certified radiologists who were blinded to phantom design and sequences parameters. Readers recorded maximal polyp diameter and confidence level that a polyp was present on a 1–100 point scale. Image acquisition time was also recorded.

Results

All polyps were detected by all 4 readers in the 5-mm-section thickness series. All polyps were detected by 3 readers in the 3- and 1-mm-section thickness series. The fourth reader identified 11/12 polyps in the 3- and 1-mm-section thickness series. Confidence levels were not statistically significantly different for the different section thicknesses (p = 0.28). Increasing the section thickness from 1 to 5 mm decreased image acquisition time from 3 min 54 s to 41 s.

Conclusions

Five-millimeter-section thickness was adequate for identification of 5–12 mm polyps regardless of shape. Pending further reduction in acquisition time, this prototype sequence holds promise for segmental imaging of the colon with MR colonography.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Ferlay J, Autier P, Boniol M, et al. (2007) Estimates of the cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2006. Ann Oncol 18:581–592PubMedCrossRef Ferlay J, Autier P, Boniol M, et al. (2007) Estimates of the cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2006. Ann Oncol 18:581–592PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference United States Preventive Services Task Force (2008) Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Ann Intern Med 149:627–637CrossRef United States Preventive Services Task Force (2008) Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Ann Intern Med 149:627–637CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Brenner H, Stock C, Hoffmeister M (2014) Effect of screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies. BMJ . doi:10.1136/bmj.g2467 Brenner H, Stock C, Hoffmeister M (2014) Effect of screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies. BMJ . doi:10.​1136/​bmj.​g2467
5.
go back to reference Leslie A, Carey FA, Pratt NR, Steele RJC (2002) The colorectal adenoma-carcinoma sequence. Br J Surg 89:845–860PubMedCrossRef Leslie A, Carey FA, Pratt NR, Steele RJC (2002) The colorectal adenoma-carcinoma sequence. Br J Surg 89:845–860PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, et al. (1993) Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 329:1977–1981PubMedCrossRef Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, et al. (1993) Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 329:1977–1981PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Atkin WS, Morson BC, Cuzick J (1992) Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after excision of rectosigmoid adenomas. N Engl J Med 326:658–662PubMedCrossRef Atkin WS, Morson BC, Cuzick J (1992) Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after excision of rectosigmoid adenomas. N Engl J Med 326:658–662PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ, et al. (2012) Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 366:687–696PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ, et al. (2012) Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 366:687–696PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Selby JV, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CP Jr, Weiss NS (1992) A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 326:653–657PubMedCrossRef Selby JV, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CP Jr, Weiss NS (1992) A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 326:653–657PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Wolff WI, Shinya H (1973) Polypectomy via the fiberoptic colonoscope—removal of neoplasms beyond the reach of the sigmoidoscope. N Engl J Med 288:329–332PubMedCrossRef Wolff WI, Shinya H (1973) Polypectomy via the fiberoptic colonoscope—removal of neoplasms beyond the reach of the sigmoidoscope. N Engl J Med 288:329–332PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Doubeni CA, Laiyemo AO, Klabunde CN, et al. (2010) Racial and ethnic trends of colorectal cancer screening among Medicare enrollees. Am J Prev Med 38:184–191PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Doubeni CA, Laiyemo AO, Klabunde CN, et al. (2010) Racial and ethnic trends of colorectal cancer screening among Medicare enrollees. Am J Prev Med 38:184–191PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2012) Cancer screening—United States, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 61:41–45 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2012) Cancer screening—United States, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 61:41–45
14.
go back to reference Taylor DP, Cannon-Albright LA, Sweeney C, et al. (2011) Comparison of compliance for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance by colonoscopy based on risk. Genet Med 13:737–743PubMedCrossRef Taylor DP, Cannon-Albright LA, Sweeney C, et al. (2011) Comparison of compliance for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance by colonoscopy based on risk. Genet Med 13:737–743PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Subramanian S, Klosterman M, Amonkar MM, Hunt TL (2004) Adherence with colorectal cancer screening guidelines: a review. Prev Med 38:536–550PubMedCrossRef Subramanian S, Klosterman M, Amonkar MM, Hunt TL (2004) Adherence with colorectal cancer screening guidelines: a review. Prev Med 38:536–550PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Madlensky L, Esplen MJ, Goel V (2004) Reasons given by relatives of colorectal cancer patients for not undergoing screening. Prev Med 39:643–648PubMedCrossRef Madlensky L, Esplen MJ, Goel V (2004) Reasons given by relatives of colorectal cancer patients for not undergoing screening. Prev Med 39:643–648PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Bujanda L, Sarasqueta C, Zubiaurre L, et al. (2007) Low adherence to colonoscopy in the screening of first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer. Gut 56:1714–1718PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Bujanda L, Sarasqueta C, Zubiaurre L, et al. (2007) Low adherence to colonoscopy in the screening of first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer. Gut 56:1714–1718PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Ghevariya V, Duddempudi S, Ghevariya N, Reddy M, Anand S (2013) Barriers to screening colonoscopy in an urban population: a study to help focus further efforts to attain full compliance. Int J Colorectal Dis 28:1497–1503PubMedCrossRef Ghevariya V, Duddempudi S, Ghevariya N, Reddy M, Anand S (2013) Barriers to screening colonoscopy in an urban population: a study to help focus further efforts to attain full compliance. Int J Colorectal Dis 28:1497–1503PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Pitts SBJ, Lea CS, May CL, et al. (2013) “Fault-line of an Earthquake”: a qualitative examination of barriers and facilitators to colorectal cancer screening in rural, eastern North Carolina. J Rural Health 29:78–87CrossRef Pitts SBJ, Lea CS, May CL, et al. (2013) “Fault-line of an Earthquake”: a qualitative examination of barriers and facilitators to colorectal cancer screening in rural, eastern North Carolina. J Rural Health 29:78–87CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Vining DJ, Gelfand DW, Bechtold RE, et al. (1994) Technical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality (abstr). AJR Am J Roentgenol 162(Suppl 1):104 Vining DJ, Gelfand DW, Bechtold RE, et al. (1994) Technical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality (abstr). AJR Am J Roentgenol 162(Suppl 1):104
21.
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 349:2191–2200PubMedCrossRef 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 349:2191–2200PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Halligan S, Marmo R (2011) Colorectal cancer: CT colonography and colonoscopy for detection—systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 259:393–405PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Halligan S, Marmo R (2011) Colorectal cancer: CT colonography and colonoscopy for detection—systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 259:393–405PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Fletcher JG, Booya F, Melton Z, et al. (2007) Automated polyp measurement with CT colonography: preliminary observations in a phantom colon model. AJR 188:945–952PubMedCrossRef Fletcher JG, Booya F, Melton Z, et al. (2007) Automated polyp measurement with CT colonography: preliminary observations in a phantom colon model. AJR 188:945–952PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Petrick N, Haider M, Summers RM, et al. (2008) CT colonography with computer-aided detection as a second reader: observer performance study. Radiology 246(1):148–156PubMedCrossRef Petrick N, Haider M, Summers RM, et al. (2008) CT colonography with computer-aided detection as a second reader: observer performance study. Radiology 246(1):148–156PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Johnson KT, Johnson CD, Anderson SM, Bruesewitz MR, McCollough CH (2004) CT colonography: determination of optimal CT technique using a novel colon phantom. Abdom Imaging 29:173–176PubMedCrossRef Johnson KT, Johnson CD, Anderson SM, Bruesewitz MR, McCollough CH (2004) CT colonography: determination of optimal CT technique using a novel colon phantom. Abdom Imaging 29:173–176PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Saha S, Shaik M, Saha S, et al. (2013) Use of tumor size to predict long-term survival in colon cancer patients: analysis of National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). (abstr) American Society of Clin Oncol 2013 Annual Meeting Saha S, Shaik M, Saha S, et al. (2013) Use of tumor size to predict long-term survival in colon cancer patients: analysis of National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). (abstr) American Society of Clin Oncol 2013 Annual Meeting
32.
go back to reference Siegel R, DeSantis C, Jemal A (2014) Colorectal cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 64:104–117PubMedCrossRef Siegel R, DeSantis C, Jemal A (2014) Colorectal cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 64:104–117PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Battersby NJ, Moran B, Yu S, Tekkis P, Brown G (2014) MR imaging for rectal cancer: the role of staging the primary and response to neoadjuvant therapy. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 8:703–719PubMedCrossRef Battersby NJ, Moran B, Yu S, Tekkis P, Brown G (2014) MR imaging for rectal cancer: the role of staging the primary and response to neoadjuvant therapy. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 8:703–719PubMedCrossRef
34.
go back to reference Graser A, Melzer A, Lindner E, et al. (2013) Magnetic resonance colonography for the detection of colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. Gastroenterology 144:743–750PubMedCrossRef Graser A, Melzer A, Lindner E, et al. (2013) Magnetic resonance colonography for the detection of colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. Gastroenterology 144:743–750PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Saar B, Gschossmann JM, Bonel HM, et al. (2008) Evaluation of magnetic resonance colonography at 3.0 Tesla regarding diagnostic accuracy and image quality. Invest Radiol 43:580–586PubMedCrossRef Saar B, Gschossmann JM, Bonel HM, et al. (2008) Evaluation of magnetic resonance colonography at 3.0 Tesla regarding diagnostic accuracy and image quality. Invest Radiol 43:580–586PubMedCrossRef
36.
go back to reference Rottgen R, Herzog H, Bogen P, et al. (2006) MR colonoscopy at 3.0 T: comparison with 1.5 T in vivo and a colon model. Clin Imaging 30:248–253PubMedCrossRef Rottgen R, Herzog H, Bogen P, et al. (2006) MR colonoscopy at 3.0 T: comparison with 1.5 T in vivo and a colon model. Clin Imaging 30:248–253PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Saar B, Meining A, Beer A, et al. (2007) Prospective study on bright lumen magnetic resonance colonography in comparison with conventional colonoscopy. Br J Radiol 80:235–241PubMedCrossRef Saar B, Meining A, Beer A, et al. (2007) Prospective study on bright lumen magnetic resonance colonography in comparison with conventional colonoscopy. Br J Radiol 80:235–241PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Kuehle CA, Langhorst J, Ladd SC, et al. (2007) Magnetic resonance colonography without bowel cleansing: a prospective cross sectional study in a screening population. Gut 56:1079–1085PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Kuehle CA, Langhorst J, Ladd SC, et al. (2007) Magnetic resonance colonography without bowel cleansing: a prospective cross sectional study in a screening population. Gut 56:1079–1085PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
39.
Metadata
Title
Optimal section thickness for detection of polyps at MR: resolution phantom study
Authors
Courtney C. Moreno
Pardeep K. Mittal
Nicholas L. Henson
Deborah A. Baumgarten
Lauren F. Alexander
Timothy S. Hanes
William C. Small
Hiroumi D. Kitajima
Jian Kang
John R. Votaw
John N. Oshinski
W. Thomas Dixon
Publication date
01-08-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Abdominal Radiology / Issue 6/2015
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Electronic ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0331-6

Other articles of this Issue 6/2015

Abdominal Radiology 6/2015 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