Adverse events Following Computed Tomographic Colonography compared to Optical Colonoscopy in the Elderly.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To evaluate gastrointestinal and cardiovascular adverse event risks associated with optical colonoscopy (OC) among Medicare outpatients who received computed tomography colonography (CTC) as their initial method of colorectal evaluation.Methods
Medicare claims were compared between 6,114 outpatients ≥ 66 years who received initial CTC and 149,202 outpatients who received initial OC between January 2007 and December 2008. OC patients were matched on county of residence and year of evaluation. Outcomes included lower gastrointestinal bleeding, gastrointestinal perforation, other gastrointestinal events and cardiovascular events resulting in an emergency department visit or hospitalization within 30 days.Results
Among 1,000 outpatients undergoing initial CTC, 12.4 experienced lower gastrointestinal bleeding, 0.7 perforation, 18.0 other gastrointestinal events and 45.5 cardiovascular events within 30 days. After multivariate adjustment, risks of lower gastrointestinal bleeding, other gastrointestinal events and cardiovascular events were higher with initial OC than CTC, with or without subsequent OC (OR 1.91 95CI [1.47,2.49], OR 1.35 95CI [1.07,1.69] and OR 1.38 95CI [1.18,1.62], respectively); however, perforation risk did not differ (p=0.10). This pattern is similar in older and symptomatic populations.Conclusion
Rates of gastrointestinal bleeding, other gastrointestinal events and cardiovascular events are lower following initial CTC than OC, but rates of perforation do not differ.
SUBMITTER: Zafar HM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4266938 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposePost-operative surveillance strategies for colorectal cancer (CRC) include periodic optical colonoscopy (OC) and abdominal-pelvic CT scan. Adherence with these recommendations is limited. For CRC screening, CT colonography (CTC) identifies larger adenomas and cancers nearly as well as OC. Most screening studies demonstrate that patients prefer CTC. However, CTC has never been compared to OC in the post-operative surveillance setting.MethodsWe hypothesized that CTC might represent an attractive substitute for the standard OC/CT scan combination. Here, 223 patients underwent CTC followed by same day OC 1 year after curative CRC resection.ResultsOf the 144/223 (64.6%) participants with a preference, 65.9% (95/144) preferred OC. This preference was more pronounced in women and in patients with polyps detected. No additional patient level factors significantly altered this primary result.ConclusionsIn contrast to CRC screening, this first study in CRC post-operative surveillance patients demonstrates a preference for OC. Assuming patient preference is an important determinant, introduction of CTC as a method to increase patient adherence with CRC surveillance is unlikely to be effective.Trial registrationClinical Trials.gov registration number: NCT02143115.
| S-EPMC7534185 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To compare differences in Medicare costs 1 year after initial computed tomographic colonography (CTC) or initial optical colonoscopy (OC).We performed a retrospective cohort study of asymptomatic Medicare outpatients aged ? 66 years who received initial CTC (n = 531) or OC (n = 17,593) between January 2007 and December 2008; initial OC patients were matched on county of residence and year of screening. Outcomes included differences in total inpatient and outpatient Medicare costs 1 year after initial CTC or OC and differences in outpatient testing of potential findings in the colon, abdomen, pelvis, and lungs.Higher adjusted costs per patient were revealed in the year after initial CTC compared to initial OC for outpatient testing related to potential colonic ($50; 95% confidence interval [CI], $12-$88; P = .010) and extracolonic findings ($64; 95% CI, $23-$106; P = .002). However, there were no differences in adjusted total costs per patient in the year after either modality ($2065; 95% CI, $1672-$5803; P = .28). Similarly, adjusted costs did not differ between cohorts for inpatient ($267; 95% CI, $1017-$1550; P = .68) or outpatient care ($2828; 95% CI, $311-$5966; P = .08).Despite higher adjusted costs of outpatient testing potentially related to colonic and extracolonic findings among asymptomatic elderly patients 1 year after initial CTC compared to OC, we found no differences in adjusted total, inpatient, or outpatient costs between cohorts. Although Medicare does not cover screening CTC, our results suggest that these modalities generate comparable downstream costs to payers.
| S-EPMC4418202 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Texture features have played an essential role in the field of medical imaging for computer-aided diagnosis. The gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM)-based texture descriptor has emerged to become one of the most successful feature sets for these applications. This study aims to increase the potential of these features by introducing multi-scale analysis into the construction of GLCM texture descriptor. In this study, we first introduce a new parameter - stride, to explore the definition of GLCM. Then we propose three multi-scaling GLCM models according to its three parameters, (1) learning model by multiple displacements, (2) learning model by multiple strides (LMS), and (3) learning model by multiple angles. These models increase the texture information by introducing more texture patterns and mitigate direction sparsity and dense sampling problems presented in the traditional Haralick model. To further analyze the three parameters, we test the three models by performing classification on a dataset of 63 large polyp masses obtained from computed tomography colonoscopy consisting of 32 adenocarcinomas and 31 benign adenomas. Finally, the proposed methods are compared to several typical GLCM-texture descriptors and one deep learning model. LMS obtains the highest performance and enhances the prediction power to 0.9450 with standard deviation 0.0285 by area under the curve of receiver operating characteristics score which is a significant improvement.
| S-EPMC7099560 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundComputerized tomographic (CT) colonography is a potential alternative to colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. Its main advantage, a better safety profile, may be offset by its limitations: lower sensitivity, need for colonoscopy in cases where results are positive, and expense.MethodsWe performed an economic evaluation, using decision analysis, to compare CT colonography with colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening in patients over 50 years of age. Three-year outcomes included number of colonoscopies, perforations and adenomas removed; deaths from perforation and from colorectal cancer from missed adenomas; and direct health care costs. The expected prevalence of adenomas, test performance characteristics of CT colonography and colonoscopy, and probability of colonoscopy complications and cancer from missed adenomas were derived from the literature. Costs were determined in detail locally.ResultsUsing the base-case assumptions, a strategy of CT colonography for colorectal cancer screening would cost 2.27 million dollars extra per 100,000 patients screened; 3.78 perforation-related deaths would be avoided, but 4.11 extra deaths would occur from missed adenomas. Because screening with CT colonography would cost more and result in more deaths overall compared with colonoscopy, the latter remained the dominant strategy. Our results were sensitive to CT colonography's test performance characteristics, the malignant risk of missed adenomas, the risk of perforation and related death, the procedural costs and differences in screening adherence.InterpretationAt present, CT colonography cannot be recommended as a primary means of population-based colorectal cancer screening in Canada.
| S-EPMC1247700 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND & AIMS:Recommendations for surveillance after curative surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) include a 1-year post-resection abdominal-pelvic computed tomography (CT) scan and optical colonoscopy (OC). CT colonography (CTC), when used in CRC screening, effectively identifies colorectal polyps ?10 mm and cancers. We performed a prospective study to determine whether CTC, concurrent with CT, could substitute for OC in CRC surveillance. METHODS:Our study enrolled 231 patients with resected stage 0-III CRC, identified at 5 tertiary care academic centers. Approximately 1 year after surgery, participants underwent outpatient CTC plus CT, followed by same-day OC. CTC results were revealed after endoscopic visualization of sequential colonic segments, which were re-examined for discordant findings. The primary outcome was performance of CTC in the detection of colorectal adenomas and cancers using endoscopy as the reference standard. RESULTS:Of the 231 participants, 116 (50.2%) had polyps of any size or histology identified by OC, and 15.6% had conventional adenomas and/or serrated polyps ?6 mm. No intra-luminal cancers were detected. CTC detected patients with polyps of ?6 mm with 44.0% sensitivity (95% CI, 30.2-57.8) and 93.4% specificity (95% CI, 89.7-97.0). CTC detected polyps ?10 mm with 76.9% sensitivity (95% CI, 54.0-99.8) and 89.0% specificity (95% CI, 84.8-93.1). Similar values were found when only adenomatous polyps were considered. The negative predictive value of CTC for adenomas ?6 mm was 90.7% (95% CI, 86.7-94.5) and for adenomas ?10 mm the negative predictive value was 98.6% (95% CI, 97.0-100). CONCLUSIONS:In a CRC surveillance population 1 year following resection, CTC was inferior to OC for detecting patients with polyps ?6 mm. Clinical Trials.gov Registration Number: NCT02143115.
| S-EPMC5847443 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo compare the Medicare population cost of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening of average risk individuals by CT colonography (CTC) vs. optical colonoscopy (OC).MethodsThe authors used Medicare claims data, fee schedules, established protocols, and other sources to estimate CTC and OC per-screen costs, including the costs of OC referrals for a subset of CTC patients. They then modeled and compared the Medicare costs of patients who complied with CTC and OC screening recommendations and tested alternative scenarios.ResultsCTC is 29% less expensive than OC for the Medicare population in the base scenario. Although the CTC cost advantage is increased or reduced under alternative scenarios, it is always positive.ConclusionCTC is a cost-effective CRC screening option for the Medicare population and will likely reduce Medicare expenditures for CRC screening.
| S-EPMC4628615 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a minimally invasive technique for colonic polyps and cancer screening. Teniae coli are three bands of longitudinal smooth muscle on the colon surface. Teniae coli are important anatomically meaningful landmarks on human colon. In this paper, the authors propose an automatic teniae coli detection method for CT colonography.The original CTC slices are first segmented and reconstructed to a 3D colon surface. Then, the 3D colon surface is unfolded using a reversible projection technique. After that the unfolded colon is projected to a 2D height map. The teniae coli are detected using the height map and then reversely projected back to the 3D colon. Since teniae are located at the junctions where the haustral folds meet, the authors apply 2D Gabor filter banks to extract features of haustral folds. The maximum response of the filter banks is then selected as the feature image. The fold centers are then identified based on local maxima and thresholding on the feature image. Connecting the fold centers yields a path of the folds. Teniae coli are extracted as lines running between the fold paths. The authors used the spatial relationship between ileocecal valve (ICV) and teniae mesocolica (TM) to identify the TM, then the teniae omentalis (TO) and the teniae libera (TL) can be identified subsequently.The authors tested the proposed method on 47 cases of 37 patients, 10 of the patients with both supine and prone CT scans. The proposed method yielded performance with an average normalized root mean square error (RMSE) ( ± standard deviation [95% confidence interval]) of 4.87% ( ± 2.93%, [4.05% 5.69%]).The proposed fully-automated teniae coli detection and identification method is accurate and promising for future clinical applications.
| S-EPMC3281971 | biostudies-other
Project description:In recent years, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using computerized tomographic colonography (CTC) has attracted considerable attention. In order to better understand patient preferences for CTC versus colonoscopy, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature. Data sources included published studies, abstracts and book chapters, in any language, with publication dates from 1995 through February 2012, and with prospective or retrospective enrollment of diagnostic or screening patients who had undergone both procedures and explicit assessment of their preference for colonoscopy versus CTC. A predefined algorithm identified eligible studies using computer and hand searches performed by two independent investigators. We used a mixed effects model to pool preference differences (defined as the proportion of subjects who preferred CTC minus the proportion who preferred colonoscopy for each study). Twenty-three studies met inclusion criteria, totaling 5616 subjects. In 16 of these studies, patients preferred CTC over colonoscopy, while colonoscopy was preferred in three studies. Due to the high degree of heterogeneity, an overall pooled preference difference was not calculated. Stratified analysis revealed that studies published in radiology journals (preference difference 0.590 [95 % CI 0.485, 0.694]) seemed more likely than studies in gastroenterology (0.218 [-0.015-0.451]) or general medicine journals (-0.158 [-0.389-0.072]) to report preference for CTC (p<0.001). Studies by radiology authors showed a trend towards stronger preference for CTC compared with studies by gastroenterology authors. Symptomatic patients expressed no preference, but screening patients preferred CTC. There was no difference in preferences between studies using "masked" and "unmasked" preference ascertainment methods. Three studies featuring limited bowel preparations for CTC reported marked preference for CTC. There was no evidence of publication bias, while cumulative and exclusion analysis did not show any temporal trend or dominant study. Limitations included data heterogeneity and preference ascertainment limitations. In conclusion, most included studies reported preference for CTC. On stratified analysis, screening patients preferred CTC while diagnostic patients showed no preference. Studies published in radiology journals showed significantly stronger preference for CTC compared with studies in gastroenterology or general medicine journals.
| S-EPMC3445696 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) considered whether to reimburse computed tomographic colonography (CTC) for colorectal cancer screening of Medicare enrollees. To help inform its decision, we evaluated the reimbursement rate at which CTC screening could be cost-effective compared with the colorectal cancer screening tests that are currently reimbursed by CMS and are included in most colorectal cancer screening guidelines, namely annual fecal occult blood test (FOBT), flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years in conjunction with annual FOBT, and colonoscopy every 10 years.MethodsWe used three independently developed microsimulation models to assess the health outcomes and costs associated with CTC screening and with currently reimbursed colorectal cancer screening tests among the average-risk Medicare population. We assumed that CTC was performed every 5 years (using test characteristics from either a Department of Defense CTC study or the National CTC Trial) and that individuals with findings of 6 mm or larger were referred to colonoscopy. We computed incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the currently reimbursed screening tests and calculated the maximum cost per scan (ie, the threshold cost) for the CTC strategy to lie on the efficient frontier. Sensitivity analyses were performed on key parameters and assumptions.ResultsAssuming perfect adherence with all tests, the undiscounted number life-years gained from CTC screening ranged from 143 to 178 per 1000 65-year-olds, which was slightly less than the number of life-years gained from 10-yearly colonoscopy (152-185 per 1000 65-year-olds) and comparable to that from 5-yearly sigmoidoscopy with annual FOBT (149-177 per 1000 65-year-olds). If CTC screening was reimbursed at $488 per scan (slightly less than the reimbursement for a colonoscopy without polypectomy), it would be the most costly strategy. CTC screening could be cost-effective at $108-$205 per scan, depending on the microsimulation model used. Sensitivity analyses showed that if relative adherence to CTC screening was 25% higher than adherence to other tests, it could be cost-effective if reimbursed at $488 per scan.ConclusionsCTC could be a cost-effective option for colorectal cancer screening among Medicare enrollees if the reimbursement rate per scan is substantially less than that for colonoscopy or if a large proportion of otherwise unscreened persons were to undergo screening by CTC.
| S-EPMC2923219 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study is designed to compare traditional Colonoscopy with CT Colonography, commonly known as "virtual colonoscopy". The study will compare the ability of both procedures as screening tests to identify polyps in the colon in patients at average risk for developing polyps. The patient preferences for each procedure will be assessed by means of a standardized questionnaire. As well the ability observers with differing levels of experience to read the CT scans and detect polyps will be compared. All patients will receive both CT scans and traditional colonoscopy on the same day.
| 2093563 | ecrin-mdr-crc