ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2012
Diagnostic accuracy of laxative-free computed tomographic colonography for detection of adenomatous polyps in asymptomatic adults: a prospective evaluation.
Article in Annals of internal medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01200303 (Prospective Evaluation of Computer-Assisted, Non-Cathartic CT Colonography for Detection of Adenomatous Colonic Polyps in a Screening Cohort), which is not on this map. Cited by 48 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Prospective Evaluation of Computer-Assisted, Non-Cathartic CT Colonography for Detection of Adenomatous Colonic Polyps in a Screening Cohort
Who cites it
48 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 127 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Comparison of the participation rate between CT colonography and colonoscopy in screening population: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.The British journal of radiology · 2020Pooled it
- STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration.BMJ open · 2016Guideline
- Guideline
- Perforation rate in CT colonography: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2014Pooled it
- A novel volume-reduced CT colonography regimen using hypertonic laxative (polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid): randomized controlled trial.European radiology · 2019Trial
- Patients' experience of screening CT colonography with reduced and full bowel preparation in a randomised trial.European radiology · 2019Trial
- Bowel cleansing before CT colonography: comparison between two minimal-preparation regimens.European radiology · 2015Trial
- Non- or full-laxative CT colonography vs. endoscopic tests for colorectal cancer screening: a randomised survey comparing public perceptions and intentions to undergo testing.European radiology · 2014Trial
- Trial
- Diagnostic Performance of Non-Colonographic Routine CT for Detecting Advanced Colorectal Cancer.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2026Article
- The potential of CT colonography for colorectal cancer screening in Japan.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Review
- Development and validation of computer-aided detection for colorectal neoplasms using deep learning incorporated with computed tomography colonography.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Review
- Acceptance and Preference of Computed Tomographic Colonography and Colonoscopy: Results of a Nationwide Multicenter Comparative Questionnaire Survey in Japan.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2024Article
- Safety and importance of colonoscopy in nonagenarians.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness of surveillance with CT colonography after resection of colorectal cancer.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Electronic cleansing of tagged residue in CT colonography: what radiologists need to know.Insights into imaging · 2020Review
- Preference and Experience of Colonic Examination for Participants Presenting to Hospitals with a Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test Result.Patient preference and adherence · 2020Article
- Computed tomographic colonography with a reduced dose of laxative using a novel barium sulfate contrast agent in Japan.Japanese journal of radiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundColon screening by optical colonoscopy (OC) or computed tomographic colonography (CTC) requires a laxative bowel preparation, which inhibits screening participation.
objectiveTo assess the performance of detecting adenomas 6 mm or larger and patient experience of laxative-free, computer-aided CTC.
designProspective test comparison of laxative-free CTC and OC. The CTC included electronic cleansing and computer-aided detection. Optical colonoscopy examinations were initially blinded to CTC results, which were subsequently revealed during colonoscope withdrawal; this method permitted reexamination to resolve discrepant findings. Unblinded OC served as a reference standard. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT01200303)
settingMulticenter ambulatory imaging and endoscopy centers.
participants605 adults aged 50 to 85 years at average to moderate risk for colon cancer. MEASUREMENTS: Per-patient sensitivity and specificity of CTC and first-pass OC for detecting adenomas at thresholds of 10 mm or greater, 8 mm or greater, and 6 mm or greater; per-lesion sensitivity and survey data describing patient experience with preparations and examinations.
resultsFor adenomas 10 mm or larger, per-patient sensitivity of CTC was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.99) and specificity was 0.85 (CI, 0.82 to 0.88); sensitivity of OC was 0.95 (CI, 0.77 to 1.00) and specificity was 0.89 (CI, 0.86 to 0.91). Sensitivity of CTC was 0.70 (CI, 0.53 to 0.83) for adenomas 8 mm or larger and 0.59 (CI, 0.47 to 0.70) for those 6 mm or larger; sensitivity of OC for adenomas 8 mm or larger was 0.88 (CI, 0.73 to 0.96) and 0.76 (CI, 0.64 to 0.85) for those 6 mm or larger. The specificity of OC at the threshold of 8 mm or larger was 0.91 and at 6 mm or larger was 0.94. Specificity for OC was greater than that for CTC, which was 0.86 at the threshold of 8 mm or larger and 0.88 at 6 mm or larger (P= 0.02). Reported participant experience for comfort and difficulty of examination preparation was better with CTC than OC. LIMITATIONS: There were 3 CTC readers. The survey instrument was not independently validated.
conclusionComputed tomographic colonography was accurate in detecting adenomas 10 mm or larger but less so for smaller lesions. Patient experience was better with laxative-free CTC. These results suggest a possible role for laxative-free CTC as an alternate screening method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.