RadioGraphics
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


DOI: 10.1148/rg.272065081
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow CME Test (opens in a new window)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mang, T.
Right arrow Articles by Schima, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mang, T.
Right arrow Articles by Schima, W.
Related Collections
Right arrow Computed Tomography
Right arrow Gastrointestinal Radiology
RadioGraphics 2007;27:431-454
© RSNA, 2007


EDUCATION EXHIBIT

Pitfalls in Multi–Detector Row CT Colonography: A Systematic Approach1

Thomas Mang, MD, Andrea Maier, MD, Christina Plank, MD, Christina Mueller-Mang, MD, Christian Herold, MD and Wolfgang Schima, MD, MSc

1 From the Department of Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Presented as an education exhibit at the 2005 RSNA Annual Meeting. Received April 25, 2006; revision requested June 12 and received August 9; accepted August 23. All authors have no financial relationships to disclose. Address correspondence to T.M. (e-mail: thomas.mang{at}meduniwien.ac.at).


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 LEARNING OBJECTIVES FOR TEST...
 Introduction
 CT Colonographic Technique
 Technical Errors
 Pitfalls in Evaluation
 Conclusions
 References
 
Thin-section multi–detector row computed tomographic (CT) colonography is a powerful tool for the detection and classification of colonic lesions. However, each step in the process of a CT colonographic examination carries the potential for misdiagnosis. Suboptimal patient preparation, CT scanning protocol deficiencies, and perception and interpretation errors can lead to false-positive and false-negative findings, adversely affecting the diagnostic performance of CT colonography. These problems and pitfalls can be overcome with a variety of useful techniques and observations. A relatively clean, dry, and well-distended colon can be achieved with careful patient preparation, thereby avoiding the problem of residual stool and fluid. Knowledge of the morphologic and attenuation characteristics of common colonic lesions and artifacts can help identify bulbous haustral folds, impacted diverticula, an inverted appendiceal stump, or mobile polyps, any of which may pose problems for the radiologist. A combined two-dimensional and three-dimensional imaging approach is recommended for each colonic finding. A thorough knowledge of the various pitfalls and pseudolesions that may be encountered at CT colonography, along with use of dedicated problem-solving techniques, will help the radiologist differentiate between definite colonic lesions and pseudolesions.

© RSNA, 2007


    LEARNING OBJECTIVES FOR TEST 4
 Top
 Abstract
 LEARNING OBJECTIVES FOR TEST...
 Introduction
 CT Colonographic Technique
 Technical Errors
 Pitfalls in Evaluation
 Conclusions
 References
 
After reading this article and taking the test, the reader will be able to:


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 LEARNING OBJECTIVES FOR TEST...
 Introduction
 CT Colonographic Technique
 Technical Errors
 Pitfalls in Evaluation
 Conclusions
 References
 
Multi–detector row computed tomographic (CT) colonography affords increased opportunities for diagnostic imaging of the large bowel. Isotropic imaging of the colon with thin collimation has become standard and provides high-quality multi-planar reformatted (MPR) images and three-dimensional (3D) assessment of the entire organ. CT colonography provides planar two-dimensional (2D) and virtual 3D endoscopic images of the colon. Although radiologists are traditionally most experienced in 2D CT of the abdomen, the planar 2D approach to the gas-distended colon presents new challenges to "film" readers. The complex intraluminal anatomy of bowel loops, haustral folds, and residual fluid and stool, as well as the degree of distention, may complicate planar evaluation. On the other hand, 3D virtual endoscopy of the large bowel provides an "intraluminal" perspective on CT data that may be unfamiliar to some radiologists. Manual navigation or preprocessing of data and insufficient rendering may have complicated this approach in early versions of virtual endoscopic software.

Published results have indicated a sensitivity for CT colonography of over 90% for polyps 10 mm or larger in diameter (1). To achieve such results, adequate bowel cleansing or "fecal tagging" and reader experience are essential. In clinical practice, inadequate patient preparation and data acquisition impair examination quality. Insufficient image processing (ie, inadequate threshold or rendering) may lead to an increased number of artifacts on both 2D and 3D images. As a result, perception and interpretation errors occur, increasing the number of false-positive and false-negative findings and adversely affecting the diagnostic performance of CT colonography.

The development of multi–detector row CT changed the type and frequency of occurrence of some artifacts that were well known at helical CT. Helical CT artifacts such as respiratory and stair-step artifacts have become rare with multi–detector row CT (2). With improvements in spatial resolution, lesion depiction and differentiation also improved (35). Other artifacts, such as image noise, became more important owing to the use of thinner sections and of imaging protocols with dose reduction.

Although at present the most commonly used platform for data interpretation is a primary 2D evaluation with 3D evaluation used for problem solving (6), 3D views are becoming more feasible with recent improvements in 3D evaluation software and hardware that allow fast data handling and better image quality. Thus, primary 3D endoscopic evaluations are being used more frequently for multi–detector row CT data sets than for helical CT data sets (1). However, although the 3D image quality is high for some systems, reconstruction algorithms are still far from yielding perfect "natural" images, and human observers often have problems with navigation and orientation in the colon or with differentiation of depressed structures or artifacts from truly elevated lesions. Radiologists should be familiar with the pitfalls in multi–detector row CT colonography so as to avoid them in daily practice.

In this article, we review pitfalls and pseudolesions at multi–detector row CT colonography. In particular, we discuss and illustrate technical errors related to patient preparation, colonic distention, and image acquisition; various pitfalls of evaluation technique; and perception and interpretation errors that can made on either 2D or 3D images (Table). We also present problem-solving techniques for differentiating between true colonic lesions and pseudolesions.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Pitfalls in Multi–Detector Row CT Colonography

 

    CT Colonographic Technique
 Top
 Abstract
 LEARNING OBJECTIVES FOR TEST...
 Introduction
 CT Colonographic Technique
 Technical Errors
 Pitfalls in Evaluation
 Conclusions
 References
 
CT colonography is based on thin-section helical CT of the cleansed and distended colon. Patients generally undergo cathartic cleansing with oral administration of laxatives (eg, phosphosoda, magnesium citrate, or polyethylene glycol) (7). Better results are obtained if patients also follow a low-fiber diet for 2–3 days before the examination and a clear liquid diet on the day of the examination.

Bowel distention is performed with the patient in the left decubitus or supine position. A thin, flexible rubber catheter (eg, a small-gauge Foley catheter) is placed in the rectum, followed by gentle insufflation (either automated or manual) of carbon dioxide (CO2) or air to patient tolerance (8). Intravenous administration of antispasmodic agents such as glucagon-hydrochloride or hyoscine-N-butylbromide may reduce discomfort and spasms, but the effect on distention remains controversial (hyoscine-N-butylbromide is not licensed for use in the United States) (911).

Thin-section CT is ideally performed with a multi–detector row CT scanner with thin collimation, with the patient first in the supine and then in the prone position. An initial scout view obtained prior to scanning in each position helps ensure adequate distention of the colonic segments, with additional CO2 or air being insufflated if required (8). Intrinsic colonic lesions can be outlined by tagging residual fecal matter with oral administration of contrast material before the examination. This tagging can be achieved with use of barium or iodinated contrast material (12,13) or a combination of the two (1). In addition, colonic lesions can be enhanced with the intravenous injection of iodinated contrast agent during the second scan. However, intravenous contrast material may be contraindicated in asymptomatic patients due to the increased cost, the need for intravenous access, and the risk of allergic anaphylactic reactions (7). Therefore, the majority of CT colonographic investigators do not routinely administer intravenous contrast material (6). On the other hand, several studies have shown intravenous contrast material to be beneficial in patients with symptoms of colorectal cancer, in the evaluation of stenosis and the prestenotic colon, and in the detection of local recurrence or distant metastases in patients with a history of colorectal cancer. Thus, the administration of intravenous contrast material may be limited to these indications (1417). Each scan is acquired during a single breath hold. Useful exposure settings are 120 kVp and 50–100 mAs for both prone and supine images (3,18). With 16- to 64-section CT scanners, the use of submillimeter collimations is feasible. Data can be reconstructed as 1-mm-thick sections (7).

Image processing and interpretation is feasible on commercially available CT colonography systems that allow an interactive, manual, mouse-driven, virtual fly-through of the volume- or surface-rendered intraluminal 3D images, as well as evaluation of 2D axial and MPR images in a cine mode. Simultaneously available 2D and 3D image displays allow rapid correlation for the evaluation of any suspected finding.


    Technical Errors
 Top
 Abstract
 LEARNING OBJECTIVES FOR TEST...
 Introduction
 CT Colonographic Technique
 Technical Errors
 Pitfalls in Evaluation
 Conclusions
 References
 
For optimal image quality, the colon should be clean, dry, and completely distended. Scanning parameters should be chosen that will improve spatial resolution with regard to dose reduction and minimize artifacts.

Patient Preparation
Bowel preparation is one of the most important steps in CT colonography. A well-prepared colon will facilitate lesion detection and minimize false-positive findings, whereas residual matter in the lumen (eg, stool, fluid) may simulate or obscure colonic lesions.

Residual Stool.— Residual stool is a common finding at CT colonography and represents an important source of pitfalls. Stool can either simulate or obscure colonic lesions and lead to interpretation or perception errors. The morphologic features of stool are variable. On 3D views, stool often appears in bizarre geometric configurations with angled borders (19). However, residual fecal material may be pseudopolypoid with a round, oval, or lobulated configuration and may be mistaken for a true polyp on endoluminal views, whereas collections of stool with bizarre configurations are easier to identify as such. Therefore, careful correlation with corresponding 2D images is mandatory (Fig 1). It is especially helpful on 2D images that residual fecal material typically contains trapped gas, which appears as areas of low attenuation, as well as food particles, which appear as areas of high attenuation (19).


Figure 1A
View larger version (126K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 1a.  Residual stool in a 47-year-old man with a high familial predisposition for colorectal cancer. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image shows a broad-based, polypoid filling defect (arrow). (b) On a supine contrast material–enhanced CT scan, the pseudolesion (arrow) is unenhanced, has inhomogeneous attenuation, and contains trapped gas.

 

Figure 1B
View larger version (107K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 1b.  Residual stool in a 47-year-old man with a high familial predisposition for colorectal cancer. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image shows a broad-based, polypoid filling defect (arrow). (b) On a supine contrast material–enhanced CT scan, the pseudolesion (arrow) is unenhanced, has inhomogeneous attenuation, and contains trapped gas.

 
Because stool generally does not adhere to the bowel wall, it will almost always move to the dependent part of the colon—which can be evaluated with 2D and 3D images—when the patient’s position changes from prone to supine. However, small particles of wall-adherent fecal material may not contain gas pockets and may not move after changes in patient position, thereby simulating a small polyp (20).

In the tagging of fecal material with orally ingested barium or iodinated contrast material prior to the examination (fecal tagging) (12), only residual stool and fluid will take up contrast material, whereas the bowel wall and colonic lesions will not. Similarly, if intravenous contrast material is administered, polyps and masses will enhance, but stool will not (21,22). Both strategies have been reported as helpful in identifying residual fecal matter in the colon (12,23). However, the majority of CT colonographic investigators do not routinely administer intravenous contrast material (6).

Residual Fluid.— Residual fluid is a common finding at CT colonography, depending on the type of bowel preparation. It appears as a horizontal level in the colon on both 2D and 3D images, with homogeneous attenuation equivalent to that of water on 2D images. Residual fluid obscures colonic lesions and leads to perception errors. Because of gravity, residual fluid is always found in the dependent part of a colonic segment. Therefore, fluid is found more commonly in the descending colon and rectum with the patient supine, whereas it moves to the transverse colon with the patient prone. Consequently, performing CT colonography with the patient in both the prone and supine positions will shift retained fluid into other colonic segments, and hidden lesions will become visible (24). However, if large amounts of fluid are present, visualization of the entire mucosa may not be guaranteed at prone and supine imaging.

In general, cathartic colon preparations, such as the "Fleet kit" (Fleet Pharmaceuticals, Lynchburg, Va), which consists of phosphosoda and four bisacodyl tablets, or the "LoSo kit" (E-Z-EM, Westbury, NY), which consists of magnesium citrate and four bisacodyl tablets, render the colon drier than do colonic lavage solutions like polyethylene glycol preparations and are, therefore, preferable (25).

Distention
Underdistention.— Optimal colonic distention is a necessary prerequisite to accurate CT colonographic data interpretation. Underdistention leads to luminal narrowing or colonic segment collapse, which results in perception and interpretation errors (26).

Unlike residual fluid, gas tends to move to the highest point of the colon. Commonly, the left colon, rectum, sigmoid colon, and parts of the descending colon are collapsed when the patient is supine, whereas the transverse colon is often collapsed when the patient is prone. Scanning with the patient in both positions leads to a diagnostically important redistribution of gas during repositioning (2729). Each segment should be distended on at least one scan and, preferably, on both scans. Adequate distention is recognized by obtaining a scout view after the insufflation of gas into the colon, and additional gas can be insufflated to distend collapsed segments. Bowel distention may be improved with automated insufflation of CO2, which has been reported to confer the greatest benefit for left colonic distention when the patient is supine (30,31). Fixed gas amounts are impractical because of different anatomic constitutions.

Spasm.— Segmental colonic spasm is a physiologic luminal narrowing that results from peristaltic muscular contraction of the colon. Persistent focal spasm of the colonic wall can simulate a stenotic tumorlike lesion. Segmental colonic spasm may result in focal, circular, and, in many cases, smooth wall thickening, sometimes accompanied by simulated shoulder formation. Areas of spasm also show contrast enhancement of the wall. However, the pericolic fat tissue always appears normal and the borders of the wall are smooth (Fig 2). In contrast, stenotic cancers typically manifest as extensive wall thickening, especially with shoulder formation, as well as stranding, indistinct boundaries, and nodular protrusions into the pericolic fat tissue (32). Pericolic lymph nodes and distant metastases are signs of progression of the disease and can be evaluated with 2D image review.


Figure 2A
View larger version (100K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 2a.  Segmental colonic spasm in the descending colon in a 65-year-old man with symptoms of colorectal cancer. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image shows an irregular, circular narrowing of the colonic lumen (arrow), a finding that simulates a stenosis. (b) Supine coronal contrast-enhanced CT scan shows focal, irregular circular wall thickening with shoulder formation (arrow). The apparent lesion demonstrates enhancement. (c) Prone coronal CT scan shows a normal smooth colonic wall without signs of stenosis or wall thickening (arrow), findings that indicate that the spasm has relaxed.

 

Figure 2B
View larger version (180K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 2b.  Segmental colonic spasm in the descending colon in a 65-year-old man with symptoms of colorectal cancer. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image shows an irregular, circular narrowing of the colonic lumen (arrow), a finding that simulates a stenosis. (b) Supine coronal contrast-enhanced CT scan shows focal, irregular circular wall thickening with shoulder formation (arrow). The apparent lesion demonstrates enhancement. (c) Prone coronal CT scan shows a normal smooth colonic wall without signs of stenosis or wall thickening (arrow), findings that indicate that the spasm has relaxed.

 

Figure 2C
View larger version (149K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 2c.  Segmental colonic spasm in the descending colon in a 65-year-old man with symptoms of colorectal cancer. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image shows an irregular, circular narrowing of the colonic lumen (arrow), a finding that simulates a stenosis. (b) Supine coronal contrast-enhanced CT scan shows focal, irregular circular wall thickening with shoulder formation (arrow). The apparent lesion demonstrates enhancement. (c) Prone coronal CT scan shows a normal smooth colonic wall without signs of stenosis or wall thickening (arrow), findings that indicate that the spasm has relaxed.

 
Often, these pseudostenoses disappear during the examination when the patient’s position changes from prone to supine or vice versa. In such cases, the second series can be diagnostic in that it reveals whether the pseudostenosis disappears when the spasm relaxes. If a spasm is recognized at initial scanning, additional gas can be insufflated to distend collapsed segments for the second series. Application of a gentle, constant flow of CO2 or air is better tolerated by patients and allows the gas to percolate around the colon, whereas rapid manual insufflation of air may not only be painful, but may also result more often in spasms (33,34).

Although controversial, the administration of antispasmodic drugs, such as glucagon-hydrochloride or hyoscine-N-butylbromide, may reduce the frequency of occurrence of spasms (9,10).

Perforation.— CT colonography has been reported to be a safe, noninvasive method for examining the entire colon. In rare cases, however, bowel distention may lead to perforation of the bowel (8,35). Signs of colonic perforation include focal areas of pericolic gas as well as free intra-peritoneal gas. Wide window settings are optimal for the detection of small amounts of pericolic or intraabdominal gas (Fig 3). Most of the reported cases of perforation caused by colonic distention involved acute inflammation or stenosis of the colon and the use of a rectal balloon catheter (3537). In cases of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), especially in acute IBD or in obstructive stenosis of the colon, CT colonography is relatively contraindicated or at least should be performed with caution without the use of a rectal balloon catheter.


Figure 3
View larger version (99K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 3.  Colonic perforation in a 35-year-old woman with acute ulcerative colitis. Supine coronal CT scan shows focal pericolic air formations (arrow) around the transverse colon related to the perforation. Total flattening and disappearance of the haustra is also seen (arrowheads).

 
Scanning
Respiratory Artifacts.— Helical CT protocols with breath-hold times of 35–50 seconds are prone to breathing artifacts. Acute respiratory motion results in data misregistration and substantially degrades image quality. Respiration results in characteristic linear artifacts on 2D and 3D images that appear as abrupt wall defects or polypoid structures, often on opposite parts of the bowel wall (Fig 4) (24,38,39). On coronal or sagittal 2D reformatted images, respiratory artifacts can easily be identified as irregularities of the outer abdominal wall along the z axis. The importance of this artifact decreases with shorter acquisition times, which are feasible with multi–detector row CT scanners (2). The reduced breath-hold times of about 7–13 seconds virtually eliminate these artifacts in almost all patients.


Figure 4A
View larger version (101K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 4a.  Respiratory artifact in the lower abdomen in a 71-year-old asymptomatic man. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image shows abrupt wall defects or polypoid structures (arrows) on opposite luminal walls of the colon. (b) Supine coronal CT scan shows linear artifacts of the colonic wall (straight arrows) and wavelike irregularities of the outer abdominal wall (wavy arrow) caused by respiratory motion.

 

Figure 4B
View larger version (130K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 4b.  Respiratory artifact in the lower abdomen in a 71-year-old asymptomatic man. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image shows abrupt wall defects or polypoid structures (arrows) on opposite luminal walls of the colon. (b) Supine coronal CT scan shows linear artifacts of the colonic wall (straight arrows) and wavelike irregularities of the outer abdominal wall (wavy arrow) caused by respiratory motion.

 
Stair-Step Artifacts.— Stair-step artifacts are present only on reconstructed 3D endoluminal and 2D MPR images. On 3D images, they are seen as a series of concentric rings around the lumen of the distended colon (24,39). These artifacts increase with increasing section thickness and pitch (24,39). They are most prominent in regions of a rapid change in bowel contour along the z axis (rectum, cecum, flexures) and degrade image quality, especially on 3D endoluminal views (Fig 5). Stair-step artifacts are minimized by reducing the section thickness to 1.5 mm or less, which is standard procedure with 16–64-section multi–detector row CT.


Figure 5
View larger version (110K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 5.  Stair-step artifacts in the rectum in a 58-year-old asymptomatic woman. Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image (3-mm section thickness) shows a series of concentric rings (arrows) around the colonic lumen.

 
Image Noise.— Because of the extremely high tissue contrast between insufflated intraluminal gas and the colonic wall, substantial dose reduction without sacrificing polyp detectability has been reported (3,4042). However, a substantial dose reduction leads to an increase in image noise, which degrades the quality of 2D images and, even more, of 3D endoluminal images (41). In addition, if a multi–detector row CT scanner with thin collimation and reconstruction of thin sections (necessary for high-quality reconstructed 3D images) is used, the degree of image noise will increase substantially (43).

On 3D images, increased image noise appears as a diffusely granular or nodular surface pattern, whereas the colonic wall retains its normal thickness and anatomic features on 2D images. These "pseudochanges" should not be confused with an IBD, in which granular wall patterns are also present but the wall is thickened in affected segments and, in advanced disease, haustral folds are absent (44). If one or both series (ie, prone and supine) are performed with a standard dose, image noise is easily recognized as such (Fig 6).


Figure 6A
View larger version (103K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 6a.  Image noise in a 70-year-old asymptomatic man. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image (50 mAs) shows a smooth bowel wall with a 10-mm polyp (arrow). (b) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image (10 mAs) shows the bowel wall with a continuous granular-nodular surface pattern due to increasing noise. Note that the polyp (arrow) is still visible with the decreased dose.

 

Figure 6B
View larger version (101K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 6b.  Image noise in a 70-year-old asymptomatic man. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image (50 mAs) shows a smooth bowel wall with a 10-mm polyp (arrow). (b) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image (10 mAs) shows the bowel wall with a continuous granular-nodular surface pattern due to increasing noise. Note that the polyp (arrow) is still visible with the decreased dose.

 
In a routine setting, a dose reduction to 50 mAs for one or both series is feasible, although good results have been reported with even lower milliamperage-seconds (3,40). Therefore, noise reduction on 3D images may be helpful, and can be achieved with image filtering (41). Because the subjectively perceived image noise is inversely related to window width, 2D image analysis with wide window settings may be helpful in cases of increased image noise (42).

Metallic Artifacts.— Metallic structures cause beam-hardening artifacts that significantly degrade axial and endoluminal image quality and obscure large portions of the bowel wall. Metallic artifacts are particularly common in the pelvis in patients who have undergone total hip replacement. These artifacts appear as large streaks on 2D images and as bizarre linear intraluminal structures on 3D images and may obscure wall disease and preclude accurate assessment of the bowel segment (Fig 7) (24,39). In patients with a hip prosthesis, evaluation of the rectosigmoid colon is limited.


Figure 7
View larger version (118K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 7.  Metallic artifacts in a 70-year-old woman with bilateral hip prostheses. Prone CT scan shows prominent streaks obscuring large portions of the rectal bowel wall. A 3D endoluminal CT image (inset) demonstrates bizarre luminal artifacts and granular wall irregularity.

 

    Pitfalls in Evaluation
 Top
 Abstract
 LEARNING OBJECTIVES FOR TEST...
 Introduction
 CT Colonographic Technique
 Technical Errors
 Pitfalls in Evaluation
 Conclusions
 References
 
Pitfalls in evaluation can be related to the evaluation technique and to reading errors. With regard to the former, the correct use of different window level settings, 3D threshold values, and modern rendering mechanisms are important for avoiding pitfalls. In data evaluation, pitfalls include failure to detect a lesion (perception errors) and misinterpretation of a finding (interpretation errors) and can occur with either 2D or 3D images.

Evaluation Technique
Threshold Values for 2D Imaging.— Two window width and level settings are typically used for 2D data evaluation: a wide "polyp window" setting (width, 1500 HU; level, –200 HU) and a narrow soft-tissue window setting (width, 400 HU; level, 10 HU) (19). Wide window settings (eg, lung or bone windowing) impart a high-contrast interface to help detect intraluminal colorectal lesions and display more structures of the bowel wall, such as the thin haustral folds that might not be seen with narrow window settings. However, this benefit is compromised by the loss of differentiation with regard to the internal structure of the colon.

Conversely, narrow window settings (eg, soft-tissue windowing) permit better interpretation of the findings with regard to attenuation and internal structure (eg, polyp vs lipoma). However, this benefit is reduced by the loss of detail concerning bowel wall structure: Thin haustral folds or interfaces where the colonic wall is adjacent to other bowel segments, as well as pericolic gas as a sign of perforation, may not be displayed properly (Fig 8). Results of a recent study indicated significant differences in results obtained with various reconstruction algorithms, with "soft" algorithms being preferred to the standard algorithm (45).


Figure 8A
View larger version (107K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 8a.  Effect of varying the window width and level. (a) Supine CT scan (window width, 1500 HU; window level, –200 HU) clearly depicts a thin haustral fold (arrowhead), with loss of differentiation of the fat attenuation of a lipoma (arrow). (b) The same supine CT scan as seen with narrower window settings (width, 400 HU; level, 140 HU) shows better differentiation of the fat attenuation of the lipoma (arrow), but the thin haustral fold (arrowhead) is now displayed incompletely.

 

Figure 8B
View larger version (121K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 8b.  Effect of varying the window width and level. (a) Supine CT scan (window width, 1500 HU; window level, –200 HU) clearly depicts a thin haustral fold (arrowhead), with loss of differentiation of the fat attenuation of a lipoma (arrow). (b) The same supine CT scan as seen with narrower window settings (width, 400 HU; level, 140 HU) shows better differentiation of the fat attenuation of the lipoma (arrow), but the thin haustral fold (arrowhead) is now displayed incompletely.

 
In evaluation of the colon, both wall visualization and differentiation are needed. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate a lesion with multiple window width and level settings during CT colonography, thereby facilitating the identification of gas, high-attenuation material, and adipose tissue (7). In addition, it has been suggested that CT window width and level have a strong influence on manual 2D polyp measurement in that the size of the lesion diminishes with narrow window settings and increases with wide window settings (46).

Three-dimensional Shine-Through Artifacts.— Modern 3D workstations offer reconstruction presettings for virtually reconstructed images. Although uncommon in recent software releases, suboptimal 3D reconstruction settings (eg, opacity setting for volume-rendered images or perspective shaded-surface-display [SSD] threshold) can lead to shine-through artifacts at virtual endoscopy that simulate ulceration and wall defects and degrade image quality (Fig 9) (39). These artifacts often appear in areas where the colon is not directly surrounded by pericolic tissues and the colonic wall is adjacent to other bowel segments, or perhaps in haustral folds. On corresponding 2D images, no wall defects corresponding to 3D features are present. Adjustment of opacity settings for volume-rendered images or an increased-perspective SSD threshold is helpful in overcoming these pitfalls.


Figure 9
View larger version (108K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 9.  Shine-through artifact of the colonic wall in a 59-year-old asymptomatic woman. Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image obtained with suboptimal reconstruction settings (reduced-perspective SSD threshold) shows pseudodefects of the colonic wall (arrows).

 
Three-dimensional Rendering.— A recent study showed significant differences in performance between different workstations when complete virtual endoscopy was used for primary evaluation (47). However, not only the evaluation software, but also the 3D rendering technique, may affect the performance of virtual endoscopy (48). A different quality of rendering is likely to affect bowel wall visualization and may reduce lesion conspicuity, especially of smaller lesions (Fig 10). Although this impact is less pronounced with the most recent software versions, older or nonupdated software may have an influence on data handling if 3D images are used for primary data evaluation (47).


Figure 10A
View larger version (135K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 10a.  Effect of different rendering techniques and evaluation software on lesion conspicuity. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image of an anthropomorphic colon phantom only faintly shows a small (4-mm), simulated flat lesion (crosshairs). (b) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image obtained with a more recent version of different software shows improved conspicuity of the simulated lesion (arrow).

 

Figure 10B
View larger version (98K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 10b.  Effect of different rendering techniques and evaluation software on lesion conspicuity. (a) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image of an anthropomorphic colon phantom only faintly shows a small (4-mm), simulated flat lesion (crosshairs). (b) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image obtained with a more recent version of different software shows improved conspicuity of the simulated lesion (arrow).

 
Perception Errors
Reading Technique.— A common source of false-negative results is the failure to perceive lesions. The perception of a polyp depends on (a) lesion criteria such as shape, size, and conspicuity; (b) "reader" factors such as concentration, fatigue, and expertise; (c) technical factors such as preparation, distention, scanning parameters, and visibility on both supine and prone scans; and, last but not least, (d) the reading technique used for lesion detection (26,49).

There are two primary techniques for data interpretation: a primary 2D approach and a primary 3D approach. With either technique, the alternative viewing technique must be available for problem solving and to aid in differentiating folds, fecal matter, and polyps. Investigation of only 2D or 3D projections has been shown to be less sensitive and less specific than the combined use of both visualization techniques for data evaluation (50,51).

The 3D fly-through as a primary search process makes use of 3D evaluation for lesion detection and axial 2D evaluation for characterization. Primary 3D evaluation has been shown to be sensitive for polyp detection (1). Both the conspicuity (especially of small and medium-sized polyps) and the duration of visualization are increased by using 3D endoluminal fly-through, thereby facilitating the initial search process (1). However, primary 3D evaluation must be performed with the patient in the prone and supine positions in both antegrade and retrograde directions, which is time consuming. If colonic segments are collapsed, axial 2D evaluation must be used as an alternative. Primary 3D evaluation performed in only one direction will result in a poorer performance because of missed lesions behind the haustral folds (52).

Primary axial 2D evaluation makes use of 2D views for lesion detection and 3D views for characterization. Primary 2D evaluation is based on "lumen tracking," as described by Royster et al (50), which interactively tracks through the image volume and focuses on only the air-distended colonic lumen from one end to the other, with a special focus on the cross-section of only one colonic segment at a time. Primary 2D evaluation is more time efficient (51,53) and provides information about the attenuation of findings during the search process. In addition, it has been suggested that flat or annular lesions are best seen on transverse 2D images displayed with narrow window width and level settings (19). Previous reports showed lower interobserver agreement when only 2D images were used (54).

"Overview evaluations" of multiple colonic segments, as with coronal images without a focus on any one segment, will result in a poorer performance. Even an advanced adenoma 1 cm or larger is a diminutive structure to search for in a whole patient data set and may be missed more easily if there is no focus on a particular segment.

In summary, optimal evaluation of CT colonographic data is facilitated by easy access to supine and prone 2D and 3D images. Evaluation of only supine or only prone images or evaluation in only one direction at virtual endoscopy, and restriction to only 2D or 3D evaluation, may lead to either perception or interpretation errors. At present, there is no general consensus on an optimal primary 2D or 3D approach.

Underdistention.— Underdistention of the colon leads to collapsed colonic segments. A colonic lesion located in a collapsed segment is not visible at either 2D or 3D imaging and will be missed. The acquisition of both supine and prone scans improves overall colonic distention and leads to a diagnostically important redistribution of gas, residual fluid, and stool (2729). A lesion hidden in a collapsed segment with the patient in one position will most likely be visible with the patient in the other position, and even more so if the corresponding segment has been redistended with rectal insufflation of additional gas (Fig 11).


Figure 11A
View larger version (121K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 11a.  Underdistention causing perception error in a 65-year-old man with a stenotic sigmoid cancer. (a) Supine coronal CT scan shows collapse of the descending colon (arrow). No lesion is depicted in this segment. (b) Prone coronal CT scan of the distended colonic segment shows a 9-mm synchronous polyp (arrow).

 

Figure 11B
View larger version (101K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 11b.  Underdistention causing perception error in a 65-year-old man with a stenotic sigmoid cancer. (a) Supine coronal CT scan shows collapse of the descending colon (arrow). No lesion is depicted in this segment. (b) Prone coronal CT scan of the distended colonic segment shows a 9-mm synchronous polyp (arrow).

 
In data evaluation, collapsed segments should be identified and characterized with meticulous evaluation of axial 2D images, using narrow window settings to search for masses or pericolic signs of disease such as fat stranding. Moreover, these segments should be evaluated after redistention on images obtained with the patient in the reverse position. Evaluation of both supine and prone images has been reported to have significantly greater sensitivity than evaluation of either supine or prone images alone (27,29); therefore, complete evaluation of both sets of images should be the standard procedure.

Residual Fluid.— Residual fluid can obscure colonic lesions and lead to perception errors. Lesions obscured by fluid with the patient in one position are easily detected with the patient in the other position (Fig 12). In addition, in cases of excessive retained fluid—for example, in under-distended segments—2D MPR images with narrow window settings should be used to evaluate these segments for intraluminal structures with soft-tissue attenuation. Intravenous contrast material has been reported to be helpful in enhancing submerged polyps in colonic segments that are completely filled with fluid (23). Differentiation of lesions hidden by residual fluid may be possible by tagging residual fluid (fluid tagging) with orally ingested barium or iodinated contrast material prior to the investigation (12,55).


Figure 12A
View larger version (162K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 12a.  Residual fluid obscuring a polyp in the descending colon in a 67-year-old man. Colonoscopic examination could not be completed because of a suspected stenosis. (a) Prone CT scan shows a fluid level (arrow) in the ventral dependent portion of the descending colon. (b) On a supine CT scan, the fluid level has shifted to the dorsal dependent portion of the colon, revealing a 9-mm polyp (arrow). The polyp was not seen on the prone CT scan because the lesion was submerged in residual fluid.

 

Figure 12B
View larger version (165K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 12b.  Residual fluid obscuring a polyp in the descending colon in a 67-year-old man. Colonoscopic examination could not be completed because of a suspected stenosis. (a) Prone CT scan shows a fluid level (arrow) in the ventral dependent portion of the descending colon. (b) On a supine CT scan, the fluid level has shifted to the dorsal dependent portion of the colon, revealing a 9-mm polyp (arrow). The polyp was not seen on the prone CT scan because the lesion was submerged in residual fluid.

 
Blind Spots.— Three-dimensional virtual colonoscopy simulates an endoscopic examination. Therefore, it is possible to miss lesions located in "blind spots" for the virtual camera if 3D virtual colonoscopy is used for the primary search process. These blind spots are often located behind or between crowded haustral folds. Virtual endoscopy performed in only one direction may miss a polyp located behind or between haustral folds and has been shown to be significantly less sensitive than bidirectional evaluation (52).

Bidirectional evaluation from the rectum to the cecum and back helps to overcome such pitfalls (Fig 13). If 3D virtual colonoscopy is used for the primary search process, the evaluation must be performed in both directions; otherwise, significant disease may be missed. Developments like virtual dissection or unfolded cube projections are designed to overcome blind spots and may allow unidirectional 3D evaluation. Recent reports did not show a significant improvement in sensitivity with this approach, but did show a significant reduction in examination time compared with 3D endoluminal views (5658).


Figure 13A
View larger version (107K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 13a.  Advantage of performing primary 3D virtual endoscopy in both the antegrade and retrograde directions. The patient was a 49-year-old asymptomatic man. (a) Antegrade 3D endoluminal CT image shows crowded haustral folds (arrowheads) in the hepatic flexure. No lesion is depicted. (b) Retrograde 3D endoluminal CT image of the same region shows a sessile 9-mm polyp (arrow) located behind a haustral fold (arrowhead).

 

Figure 13B
View larger version (115K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 13b.  Advantage of performing primary 3D virtual endoscopy in both the antegrade and retrograde directions. The patient was a 49-year-old asymptomatic man. (a) Antegrade 3D endoluminal CT image shows crowded haustral folds (arrowheads) in the hepatic flexure. No lesion is depicted. (b) Retrograde 3D endoluminal CT image of the same region shows a sessile 9-mm polyp (arrow) located behind a haustral fold (arrowhead).

 
Interpretation Errors
Misinterpretation of detected structures is a major source of error at CT colonography, second only to perception errors. If a suspected lesion is detected with CT colonography, a correct interpretation of morphologic features is necessary to decide whether the finding is true positive or false positive. Prior training, experience or expertise, and the innate aptitude of the individual reader are known to affect lesion interpretation (59).

Several criteria exist for correct classification of filling defects and polypoid lesions of the colon at CT colonography. Colonic filling defects are characterized on the basis of their morphologic features or shape, attenuation characteristics, and mobility (19,60). On the basis of these criteria, polyps are defined as sessile or stalked, round, oval, or lobulated intraluminal filling defects with homogeneous soft-tissue attenuation that maintain their position with respect to the bowel surface. If intravenous contrast material is administered, polyps will enhance (21,22). Colonic lipomas can be differentiated from adenomatous polyps because of their fat attenuation.

Intraluminal Content.— Residual stool may simulate a polyp if it has a polypoid shape at 3D virtual colonoscopy. The 2D imaging features of stool are helpful in overcoming this pitfall (Figs 1, 14)—in particular, the fact that residual stool has inhomogeneous attenuation because it typically contains trapped gas or food particles, whereas polyps generally have homogeneous soft-tissue attenuation (19). Stool will likely move to the dependent part of the colon when the patient’s position changes from prone to supine because it is not attached to the bowel wall (24,27).


Figure 14A
View larger version (111K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 14a.  Polypoid stool simulating a filling defect in a 73-year-old woman. Colonoscopic examination could not be completed because of diverticulosis. (a) Supine 3D endoluminal CT image shows a round, well-circumscribed, polypoid "filling defect" (arrow) in the splenic flexure of the colon. (b) Supine CT scan shows a collection of gas inside the lesion (arrow), which is located on the dorsal dependent wall. (c) Prone 3D endoluminal CT scan shows that the lesion (arrow) has moved to the ventral dependent wall, a finding that is indicative of lesion mobility.

 

Figure 14B
View larger version (140K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 14b.  Polypoid stool simulating a filling defect in a 73-year-old woman. Colonoscopic examination could not be completed because of diverticulosis. (a) Supine 3D endoluminal CT image shows a round, well-circumscribed, polypoid "filling defect" (arrow) in the splenic flexure of the colon. (b) Supine CT scan shows a collection of gas inside the lesion (arrow), which is located on the dorsal dependent wall. (c) Prone 3D endoluminal CT scan shows that the lesion (arrow) has moved to the ventral dependent wall, a finding that is indicative of lesion mobility.

 

Figure 14C
View larger version (147K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 14c.  Polypoid stool simulating a filling defect in a 73-year-old woman. Colonoscopic examination could not be completed because of diverticulosis. (a) Supine 3D endoluminal CT image shows a round, well-circumscribed, polypoid "filling defect" (arrow) in the splenic flexure of the colon. (b) Supine CT scan shows a collection of gas inside the lesion (arrow), which is located on the dorsal dependent wall. (c) Prone 3D endoluminal CT scan shows that the lesion (arrow) has moved to the ventral dependent wall, a finding that is indicative of lesion mobility.

 
Solid collections of retained barium can simulate a polypoid lesion on 3D endoluminal images (24,38,39). Retained barium may be uniformly hyperattenuating and may be mixed with stool in various patterns. However, barium-impregnated stool can be confidently distinguished from a soft-tissue mass owing to its high attenuation on 2D images, especially with soft-tissue windowing (Fig 15). This principle of high attenuation of colonic content is the basis for fecal tagging.


Figure 15A
View larger version (88K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 15a.  Solid collections of retained barium simulating a polypoid lesion in a 77-year-old patient with diverticulosis. (a) Prone 3D endoluminal CT image shows a round, well-circumscribed, polypoid filling defect in the sigmoid colon (arrow). (b) Prone coronal CT scan shows the filling defect with homogeneous high attenuation (arrow), a finding that represents barium-tagged fecal material.

 

Figure 15B
View larger version (133K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 15b.  Solid collections of retained barium simulating a polypoid lesion in a 77-year-old patient with diverticulosis. (a) Prone 3D endoluminal CT image shows a round, well-circumscribed, polypoid filling defect in the sigmoid colon (arrow). (b) Prone coronal CT scan shows the filling defect with homogeneous high attenuation (arrow), a finding that represents barium-tagged fecal material.

 
On 3D virtual endoscopic images, mucus can appear in the colonic lumen as a mobile linear streak without a polypoid head. On 2D images, mucus has low attenuation and is often visible only with wide window settings. Differentiation from a stalked polyp is easy because of the low attenuation and the lack of a polypoid head.

Depressed bowel wall structures can mimic polypoid lesions on 3D images. Gas bubbles sometimes appear on the surface of fluid levels. These gas bubbles tend to be localized and adjacent to haustral folds or corners, and are often multiple. The bubble layer cannot usually be seen on 2D or 3D images. The margin of a bubble on the surface of a fluid level is caused by adhesive forces and appears as a round depressed structure that can be confused with a polypoid or diverticular lesion on 3D images. Corresponding 2D images are helpful in identifying a slightly depressed structure in a fluid level (Fig 16).


Figure 16A
View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 16a.  Gas bubble on an intraluminal fluid level simulating a polypoid lesion in a 64-year-old asymptomatic man. (a) Drawings illustrate how a gas bubble (top) appears at CT (bottom). (b) Prone 3D endoluminal CT image shows a round, "polypoid" abnormality (arrow) in a horizontal fluid level in the colon. (c) Prone CT scan shows the abnormality to be a round, depressed structure caused by a gas bubble (arrow). Note that the bubble layer cannot be visualized at CT.

 

Figure 16B
View larger version (77K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 16b.  Gas bubble on an intraluminal fluid level simulating a polypoid lesion in a 64-year-old asymptomatic man. (a) Drawings illustrate how a gas bubble (top) appears at CT (bottom). (b) Prone 3D endoluminal CT image shows a round, "polypoid" abnormality (arrow) in a horizontal fluid level in the colon. (c) Prone CT scan shows the abnormality to be a round, depressed structure caused by a gas bubble (arrow). Note that the bubble layer cannot be visualized at CT.

 

Figure 16C
View larger version (84K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 16c.  Gas bubble on an intraluminal fluid level simulating a polypoid lesion in a 64-year-old asymptomatic man. (a) Drawings illustrate how a gas bubble (top) appears at CT (bottom). (b) Prone 3D endoluminal CT image shows a round, "polypoid" abnormality (arrow) in a horizontal fluid level in the colon. (c) Prone CT scan shows the abnormality to be a round, depressed structure caused by a gas bubble (arrow). Note that the bubble layer cannot be visualized at CT.

 
Intrinsic Lesions.— Colonic folds may appear as polypoid lesions, especially if they are complex, bulbous, or irregular and are seen in profile on 2D images (24,34). Complex fold patterns are commonly located along the short limb of the flexures. Thickened or bulbous haustral folds are usually seen in the rectum or cecum or in regions of suboptimal colonic distention (eg, sigmoid colon). With cine viewing of contiguous axial images on a workstation, the linear nature of the folds is usually confirmed. In addition, 3D virtual endoscopic views that provide an en face view of the mucosa are helpful in distinguishing between the round shape of polyps and the longitudinal structure of haustral folds (Fig 17).


Figure 17A
View larger version (123K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 17a.  Bulbous haustral fold simulating a sessile polyp in a 60-year-old asymptomatic woman. (a) Coronal CT scan shows a polypoid filling defect with soft-tissue attenuation in the cecum (arrow). (b) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image shows the filling defect (arrow) with linear morphologic features, a finding that is indicative of a haustral fold.

 

Figure 17B
View larger version (98K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 17b.  Bulbous haustral fold simulating a sessile polyp in a 60-year-old asymptomatic woman. (a) Coronal CT scan shows a polypoid filling defect with soft-tissue attenuation in the cecum (arrow). (b) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT image shows the filling defect (arrow) with linear morphologic features, a finding that is indicative of a haustral fold.

 
Collapsed colonic segments can be mistaken for annular neoplasms or inflammatory stenosis on 2D images (61). A collapsed segment produces only mild pseudothickening of the colonic wall, and the margins of the collapsed segment will gradually return to full distention. The pericolic fat always appears normal (24,34).

Scans obtained in patients with collapsed colonic segments should be inspected carefully for signs of malignancy, including asymmetric or circumferential bowel wall thickening, pericolic fat stranding, lymphadenopathy, and metastatic disease (Fig 18) (34). Moreover, a collapsed segment should be reevaluated by scrutinizing it on the corresponding supine or prone scan, after it has most likely become distended due to redistribution of gas during repositioning.


Figure 18A
View larger version (168K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 18a.  Collapsed colonic segments in two patients with suspected colorectal cancer. (a) Supine sagittal contrast-enhanced CT scan obtained in a 72-year-old man shows a collapsed rectum (arrow) with only mild pseudothickening of the colonic wall, no shoulder formations, and normal pericolic fat tissue. (b) Supine sagittal contrast-enhanced CT scan obtained in a 61-year-old man shows a collapsed rectum (arrow) with circumferential wall thickening, stranding of the pericolic fat, and contrast enhancement, findings that are indicative of malignancy. Histologic analysis revealed a rectal cancer.

 

Figure 18B
View larger version (147K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 18b.  Collapsed colonic segments in two patients with suspected colorectal cancer. (a) Supine sagittal contrast-enhanced CT scan obtained in a 72-year-old man shows a collapsed rectum (arrow) with only mild pseudothickening of the colonic wall, no shoulder formations, and normal pericolic fat tissue. (b) Supine sagittal contrast-enhanced CT scan obtained in a 61-year-old man shows a collapsed rectum (arrow) with circumferential wall thickening, stranding of the pericolic fat, and contrast enhancement, findings that are indicative of malignancy. Histologic analysis revealed a rectal cancer.

 
Sessile colonic polyps are attached to the colonic wall and are not expected to change position when the patient is turned. However, 27% of all polyps have been reported to be mobile, mostly because they have a pedunculated structure or are located in a mobile colonic segment (62,63).

Pedunculated polyps, wit