1 / 42

CT COLONOGRAPHY

CT COLONOGRAPHY. CRC Trends 1970-1990 . Incidence decreased by 7% Mortality decreased by 20% Five year survival rates increased by 12%. Colorectal Cancer . Lifetime risk for development 5% or 1:19 Lifetime risk for death : 2.5% Males slightly higher than females

arella
Download Presentation

CT COLONOGRAPHY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CT COLONOGRAPHY

  2. CRC Trends 1970-1990 • Incidence decreased by 7% • Mortality decreased by 20% • Five year survival rates increased by 12%

  3. Colorectal Cancer • Lifetime risk for development 5% or 1:19 • Lifetime risk for death : 2.5% • Males slightly higher than females • 75% in average risk patients

  4. Limited Impact • Only 37% of cases are diagnosed when the disease is localized • 20% will have distant metastases at initial diagnosis

  5. Risk factors • Age > 50 years ((90%) • Familial factors: FAP, Gardner’s, Ashkenazi Jews(APC gene), HNPCC • Racial group : African • Personal or family hx : CRC 2-4x or adenomatous polyp • Personal hx: ovarian, endometrial or breast cancer , chronic IBD > 10 years(UC>Crohn’s)

  6. CRC Risk Factors • Low fiber, high fat diet • High red meat consumption • Inactivity, obesity • Smoking • Alcohol

  7. Chemo-prevention of CRC • Aspirin, NSAIDS • Postmenopausal estrogen • Calcium, Selenium • Vitamins A, C, E and folic acid

  8. Anatomic location of CRC Rectosigmoid: 52-61% Ascending colon and cecum 19-24%

  9. Screening tests for CRC How accurate are they?

  10. FIT Advantages No dietary restrictions Safe, non-invasive, no bowel prep Inexpensive Best study regarding impact on mortality Fewer false positives from upper GI bleed Sensitivity FIT vsgFOBT 82% vs 64% for colorectal cancer 30% vs 41% for adenomatous polyps

  11. FIT Disadvantages • Most cancers bleed intermittently • Most adenomas don’t bleed • non-neoplastic : hemorrhoids, NSAID

  12. COLONOSCOPY High sensitivity and specificity Sensitivity < 5 mm 73% 6-9 mm 87% > 10mm 94% Gold standard for colon evaluation. For an average risk individual with a negative colonoscopy, further screening of any type is not required for 10 years.

  13. COLONOSCOPY- LIMITATIONS • Variable patient compliance • Requires IV sedation • Costly • Time-consuming • Incomplete in 5-10% • CRC localization accuracy 86%

  14. INCOMPLETE COLONOSCOPY • Operator inexperience • Poor bowel cleansing • Redundant bowel • Benign/malignant stricture • Severe diverticulosis

  15. COLONOSCOPY COMPLICATIONS • Perforation dx 1/1000 tx 1/500 • Bleeding 3/1000 • Death 1-3/10 000 Death rate from colon cancer in 50-54 yo is 1.8/10000

  16. PERFORATION RATES • DCBE 1/25000 • CTC 1/22000 • FLEX SIGMOIDOSCOPY 1/10000 • DIAG COLONOSCOPY 1/1000 • THERAPEUTIC COLONOSCOPY 1/500

  17. 2009 ACR/car GUIDELINES Indications 1) (screening) exam 2) surveillance exam 3) diagnostic exam 4) following incomplete colonoscopy 5) patients at risk for colonoscopy: sedation risk, anticoagulant therapy, prior incomplete colonoscopy , advanced age.

  18. CTC PRO • minimally invasive • low complication rate (perforations 0.46 per 10,000) compared to colonoscopy24 • no sedation used • usually effective where colonoscopy is technically incomplete • also images extraluminal structures

  19. CTC CON • discomfort • radiation exposure • reduced sensitivity for detection of flat polyps and polyps <6 mm25 • does not permit biopsy or polyp removal • the accuracy depends on expertise of the radiologist and adequacy of preparation • there are currently no outcome studies regarding CRC mortality prevention

  20. RADIATION • Fixed KVp at 120kv but mA varies • Linear relationship between mA and patient dose • Ultra - low dose ie 10-80mA adequate for colon • Symptomatic patients increase mA for evaluation of extra-colonic findings • Colon ca staging use normal 220 mA for complete exam

  21. 2009 ACR GUIDELINES ABSOLUTE CONTRA-INDICATIONS 1. routine f/u of IBD 2. hereditary polyposis or non-polyposis syndromes 3. evaluation of anal disease 4. pregnant patients

  22. 2009 ACR GUIDELINES RELATIVE CONTRAINDICATIONS 1. symptomatic acute colitis 2. acute diarrhea 3. recent acute diverticulitis 4. symptomatic colon containing hernia 5. symptomatic or high grade SBO 6. recent colorectal surgery 7. deep biopsy or polypectomy 8. colon perforation

  23. TECHNIQUE Supine and prone imaging Sometimes decubitus IV buscopan Co2 insufflation

  24. bUSCOPAN contra-indications • Myastenia gravis • Untreated narrow angle glaucoma • Prostate hypertrophy with urinary retention • Stenotic lesions of the GI tract • Megacolon • MI within past 6 months • Tachycardia and angina • Congestive cardiac failure

  25. The primary goal of CTC is to detect the precursor lesion of colorectal malignancy

  26. POLYPs 4 types Benign neoplastic ie adenoma Non- neoplastic ie hyperplastic ,inflammatory, hamartomatous Only 3% of adenomas will progress to malignancy 30-40% develop an adenoma by 60 yrs

  27. Adenomatous polyps • Dysplasia- mild, moderate, severe or high grade • 3 histologic types: • Tubular 85% , < 10mm • Tubulovillous 10% , >10mm • Villous 5% , 10x increased chance malignancy than tubular, 75%>20mm

  28. ADENOMA-CA PATHWAY Ca risk increases with increasing size of polyp <1% 6-9mm polyp 10% 10-20 mm polyp 10-50% >20mm polyp

  29. RECOMMENDATIONS BCRS >10mm size - 10% chance malignancy >20mm - 50% chance of malignancy = colonoscopy 6-9mm - f/u CTC in 3 years, 0.7% cancer risk (not warranting colonoscopy/biopsy) if 3 polyps found between 6-9mm size, risk malignancy is equivalent to 10mm polyp ie10% needs colonoscopy polyps less than 6mm size should not be reported, <0.1% risk malignancy

  30. Tubulovillousadenoma. (a) Endoluminal 3D view from CT colonography shows a 10-mm pedunculated polyp with a well-defined stalk. (b) Axial 2D view shows the same pedunculated polyp (arrowhead). Unlike most other pedunculated lesions, which are more easily recognized as such on 3D views, the stalk and polyp in this case happen to be aligned in a standard 2D plane.

  31. Tubulovillousadenoma. (a) Endoluminal 3D view from CT colonography shows a sessile, lobulated 20-mm polyp extending from a colonic fold. (b) Digital photograph from optical colonoscopy shows the same lobulated lesion.

  32. Villous adenoma. (a) Endoluminal 3D view from CT colonography shows a 5-cm irregular cecal mass. This papillary appearance is highly suggestive of a villous tumor. (b) Axial 2D image (without electronic cleansing of opacified fluid) shows the same irregular cecal mass (arrowheads). (c) Digital photograph from optical colonoscopy shows the papillary, frondlike nature of the mass to greater advantage. The lesion was not malignant despite its large size.

  33. Malignant polyp. Endoluminal 3D view from CT colonography in a symptomatic patient shows a large sessile mass, which proved to be malignant.

  34. Invasive adenocarcinoma. (a) Contrast material-enhanced 2D curved reformatted image with soft-tissue windowing shows an annular-constricting mass with shouldering (arrowheads) involving the sigmoid colon. Cross-sectional 2D views are much more effective than endoluminal displays for depicting invasive mass lesions. (b) Digital photograph from optical colonoscopy shows the proximal aspect of the mass.

  35. Hyperplastic polyp. (a) Endoluminal 3D view from CT colonography shows a 7-mm sessile soft-tissue lesion, which is indistinguishable from an adenomatous polyp. (b) Digital photograph from optical colonoscopy shows the same sessile polyp. Reliable distinction from an adenomatous polyp requires histologic analysis.

  36. Internal hemorrhoids. (a) Endoluminal 3D view from CT colonography shows a large, circumferential mass at the anorectal junction that surrounds the rectal catheter. (b) Digital photograph from optical colonoscopy shows internal hemorrhoids, which are at least partially thrombosed, surrounding the colonoscope.

  37. Side-by-side comparison of (inward) polyp and (outward) diverticulum. Endoluminal 3D view from CT colonography shows a 16-mm tubular adenoma (arrow) adjacent to a wide-mouth diverticulum (arrowhead). The volume rendering and lighting display used here allow for easy distinction.

More Related