Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography: Effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting

David Burling, Steve Halligan, Douglas G. Altman, Wendy Atkin, Clive Bartram, Helen Fenlon, Andrea Laghi, Jaap Stoker, Stuart Taylor, Roger Frost, Guido Dessey, Melinda De Villiers, Jasper Florie, Shane Foley, Lesley Honeyfield, Riccardo Iannaccone, Teresa Gallo, Clive Kay, Philippe Lefere, Andrew LoweFilipo Mangiapane, Jesse Marrannes, Emmanuele Neri, Giulia Nieddu, David Nicholson, Alan O'Hare, Sante Ori, Benedetta Politi, Martin Poulus, Daniele Regge, Lisa Renaut, Velauthan Rudralingham, Saverio Signoretta, Paola Vagli, Victor Van der Hulst, Jane Williams-Butt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The extent measurement error on CT colonography influences polyp categorisation according to established management guidelines is studied using twenty-eight observers of varying experience to classify polyps seen at CT colonography as either 'medium' maximal diameter 6-9 mm) or 'large' (maximal diameter 10 mm or larger). Comparison was then made with the reference diameter obtained in each patient via colonoscopy. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess agreement between observer measurements and colonoscopy, and differences in measurement and categorisation was assessed using Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-squared test statistics respectively. Observer measurements on average underestimated the diameter of polyps when compared to the reference value, by approximately 2- 3 mm, irrespective of observer experience. Ninety-five percent limits of agreement were relatively wide for all observer groups, and had sufficient span to encompass different size categories for polyps. There were 167 polyp observations and 135 (81%) were correctly categorised. Of the 32 observations that were miscategorised, 5 (16%) were overestimations and 27 (84%) were underestimations (i.e. large polyps misclassified as medium). Caution should be exercised for polyps whose colonographic diameter is below but close to the 1-cm boundary threshold in order to avoid potential miscategorisation of advanced adenomas.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1737-1744
Number of pages8
JournalEuropean Radiology
Volume16
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2006

Fingerprint

Computed Tomographic Colonography
Polyps
Colonoscopy
Adenoma
Reference Values
Guidelines

Keywords

  • Computerised tomography
  • CT colon
  • Virtual colonoscopy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Burling, D., Halligan, S., Altman, D. G., Atkin, W., Bartram, C., Fenlon, H., ... Williams-Butt, J. (2006). Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography: Effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting. European Radiology, 16(8), 1737-1744. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0189-2

Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography : Effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting. / Burling, David; Halligan, Steve; Altman, Douglas G.; Atkin, Wendy; Bartram, Clive; Fenlon, Helen; Laghi, Andrea; Stoker, Jaap; Taylor, Stuart; Frost, Roger; Dessey, Guido; De Villiers, Melinda; Florie, Jasper; Foley, Shane; Honeyfield, Lesley; Iannaccone, Riccardo; Gallo, Teresa; Kay, Clive; Lefere, Philippe; Lowe, Andrew; Mangiapane, Filipo; Marrannes, Jesse; Neri, Emmanuele; Nieddu, Giulia; Nicholson, David; O'Hare, Alan; Ori, Sante; Politi, Benedetta; Poulus, Martin; Regge, Daniele; Renaut, Lisa; Rudralingham, Velauthan; Signoretta, Saverio; Vagli, Paola; Van der Hulst, Victor; Williams-Butt, Jane.

In: European Radiology, Vol. 16, No. 8, 08.2006, p. 1737-1744.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Burling, D, Halligan, S, Altman, DG, Atkin, W, Bartram, C, Fenlon, H, Laghi, A, Stoker, J, Taylor, S, Frost, R, Dessey, G, De Villiers, M, Florie, J, Foley, S, Honeyfield, L, Iannaccone, R, Gallo, T, Kay, C, Lefere, P, Lowe, A, Mangiapane, F, Marrannes, J, Neri, E, Nieddu, G, Nicholson, D, O'Hare, A, Ori, S, Politi, B, Poulus, M, Regge, D, Renaut, L, Rudralingham, V, Signoretta, S, Vagli, P, Van der Hulst, V & Williams-Butt, J 2006, 'Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography: Effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting', European Radiology, vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 1737-1744. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0189-2
Burling, David ; Halligan, Steve ; Altman, Douglas G. ; Atkin, Wendy ; Bartram, Clive ; Fenlon, Helen ; Laghi, Andrea ; Stoker, Jaap ; Taylor, Stuart ; Frost, Roger ; Dessey, Guido ; De Villiers, Melinda ; Florie, Jasper ; Foley, Shane ; Honeyfield, Lesley ; Iannaccone, Riccardo ; Gallo, Teresa ; Kay, Clive ; Lefere, Philippe ; Lowe, Andrew ; Mangiapane, Filipo ; Marrannes, Jesse ; Neri, Emmanuele ; Nieddu, Giulia ; Nicholson, David ; O'Hare, Alan ; Ori, Sante ; Politi, Benedetta ; Poulus, Martin ; Regge, Daniele ; Renaut, Lisa ; Rudralingham, Velauthan ; Signoretta, Saverio ; Vagli, Paola ; Van der Hulst, Victor ; Williams-Butt, Jane. / Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography : Effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting. In: European Radiology. 2006 ; Vol. 16, No. 8. pp. 1737-1744.
@article{21ba7e55078b4e43b964b2f16c06d9f5,
title = "Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography: Effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting",
abstract = "The extent measurement error on CT colonography influences polyp categorisation according to established management guidelines is studied using twenty-eight observers of varying experience to classify polyps seen at CT colonography as either 'medium' maximal diameter 6-9 mm) or 'large' (maximal diameter 10 mm or larger). Comparison was then made with the reference diameter obtained in each patient via colonoscopy. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess agreement between observer measurements and colonoscopy, and differences in measurement and categorisation was assessed using Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-squared test statistics respectively. Observer measurements on average underestimated the diameter of polyps when compared to the reference value, by approximately 2- 3 mm, irrespective of observer experience. Ninety-five percent limits of agreement were relatively wide for all observer groups, and had sufficient span to encompass different size categories for polyps. There were 167 polyp observations and 135 (81{\%}) were correctly categorised. Of the 32 observations that were miscategorised, 5 (16{\%}) were overestimations and 27 (84{\%}) were underestimations (i.e. large polyps misclassified as medium). Caution should be exercised for polyps whose colonographic diameter is below but close to the 1-cm boundary threshold in order to avoid potential miscategorisation of advanced adenomas.",
keywords = "Computerised tomography, CT colon, Virtual colonoscopy",
author = "David Burling and Steve Halligan and Altman, {Douglas G.} and Wendy Atkin and Clive Bartram and Helen Fenlon and Andrea Laghi and Jaap Stoker and Stuart Taylor and Roger Frost and Guido Dessey and {De Villiers}, Melinda and Jasper Florie and Shane Foley and Lesley Honeyfield and Riccardo Iannaccone and Teresa Gallo and Clive Kay and Philippe Lefere and Andrew Lowe and Filipo Mangiapane and Jesse Marrannes and Emmanuele Neri and Giulia Nieddu and David Nicholson and Alan O'Hare and Sante Ori and Benedetta Politi and Martin Poulus and Daniele Regge and Lisa Renaut and Velauthan Rudralingham and Saverio Signoretta and Paola Vagli and {Van der Hulst}, Victor and Jane Williams-Butt",
year = "2006",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1007/s00330-006-0189-2",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "1737--1744",
journal = "European Radiology",
issn = "0938-7994",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography

T2 - Effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting

AU - Burling, David

AU - Halligan, Steve

AU - Altman, Douglas G.

AU - Atkin, Wendy

AU - Bartram, Clive

AU - Fenlon, Helen

AU - Laghi, Andrea

AU - Stoker, Jaap

AU - Taylor, Stuart

AU - Frost, Roger

AU - Dessey, Guido

AU - De Villiers, Melinda

AU - Florie, Jasper

AU - Foley, Shane

AU - Honeyfield, Lesley

AU - Iannaccone, Riccardo

AU - Gallo, Teresa

AU - Kay, Clive

AU - Lefere, Philippe

AU - Lowe, Andrew

AU - Mangiapane, Filipo

AU - Marrannes, Jesse

AU - Neri, Emmanuele

AU - Nieddu, Giulia

AU - Nicholson, David

AU - O'Hare, Alan

AU - Ori, Sante

AU - Politi, Benedetta

AU - Poulus, Martin

AU - Regge, Daniele

AU - Renaut, Lisa

AU - Rudralingham, Velauthan

AU - Signoretta, Saverio

AU - Vagli, Paola

AU - Van der Hulst, Victor

AU - Williams-Butt, Jane

PY - 2006/8

Y1 - 2006/8

N2 - The extent measurement error on CT colonography influences polyp categorisation according to established management guidelines is studied using twenty-eight observers of varying experience to classify polyps seen at CT colonography as either 'medium' maximal diameter 6-9 mm) or 'large' (maximal diameter 10 mm or larger). Comparison was then made with the reference diameter obtained in each patient via colonoscopy. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess agreement between observer measurements and colonoscopy, and differences in measurement and categorisation was assessed using Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-squared test statistics respectively. Observer measurements on average underestimated the diameter of polyps when compared to the reference value, by approximately 2- 3 mm, irrespective of observer experience. Ninety-five percent limits of agreement were relatively wide for all observer groups, and had sufficient span to encompass different size categories for polyps. There were 167 polyp observations and 135 (81%) were correctly categorised. Of the 32 observations that were miscategorised, 5 (16%) were overestimations and 27 (84%) were underestimations (i.e. large polyps misclassified as medium). Caution should be exercised for polyps whose colonographic diameter is below but close to the 1-cm boundary threshold in order to avoid potential miscategorisation of advanced adenomas.

AB - The extent measurement error on CT colonography influences polyp categorisation according to established management guidelines is studied using twenty-eight observers of varying experience to classify polyps seen at CT colonography as either 'medium' maximal diameter 6-9 mm) or 'large' (maximal diameter 10 mm or larger). Comparison was then made with the reference diameter obtained in each patient via colonoscopy. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess agreement between observer measurements and colonoscopy, and differences in measurement and categorisation was assessed using Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-squared test statistics respectively. Observer measurements on average underestimated the diameter of polyps when compared to the reference value, by approximately 2- 3 mm, irrespective of observer experience. Ninety-five percent limits of agreement were relatively wide for all observer groups, and had sufficient span to encompass different size categories for polyps. There were 167 polyp observations and 135 (81%) were correctly categorised. Of the 32 observations that were miscategorised, 5 (16%) were overestimations and 27 (84%) were underestimations (i.e. large polyps misclassified as medium). Caution should be exercised for polyps whose colonographic diameter is below but close to the 1-cm boundary threshold in order to avoid potential miscategorisation of advanced adenomas.

KW - Computerised tomography

KW - CT colon

KW - Virtual colonoscopy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33745818854&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33745818854&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00330-006-0189-2

DO - 10.1007/s00330-006-0189-2

M3 - Article

C2 - 16636803

AN - SCOPUS:33745818854

VL - 16

SP - 1737

EP - 1744

JO - European Radiology

JF - European Radiology

SN - 0938-7994

IS - 8

ER -