Admission blood glucose level after AMI is an independent predictor of long-term mortality in patients with and without known diabetes. Subjects with unknown diabetes and admission glucose levels of 200 mg/dL (11.1 mmol/L) or more after AMI have mortality rates comparable to those of subjects with established diabetes. Admission blood glucose level may serve to identify subjects at high long-term mortality risk, in particular among those with unknown diabetes.

No abstract

ObjectivesPrevious meta-analyses on CT-colonography included both average and high risk individuals, which may overestimate the diagnostic value in screening. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain the value of CT-colonography for screening.MethodsA search was performed using PubMed, Embase and Cochrane. Article selection and critical appraisal was done by two reviewers. Inclusion criteria: prospective, randomized trials or cohort studies comparing CT-colonography with colonoscopy (≥50 participants), ≥95% average risk participants ≥50 years. Study characteristics and 2 × 2 contingency Tables were recorded. Sensitivity and specificity estimates were calculated per patient and per polyp (≥6 mm, ≥10 mm), using univariate and bivariate analyses.ResultsFive of 1,021 studies identified were included, including 4,086 participants (<1% high risk). I2-values showed substantial heterogeneity, especially for 6–9 mm polyps and adenomas: 68.1% vs. 78.6% (sensitivity per patient). Estimated sensitivities for patients with polyps or adenomas ≥ 6 mm were 75.9% and 82.9%, corresponding specificities 94.6% and 91.4%. Estimated sensitivities for patients with polyps or adenomas ≥ 10 mm were 83.3% and 87.9%, corresponding specificities 98.7% and 97.6%. Estimated sensitivities per polyp for advanced adenomas ≥ 6 mm and ≥ 10 mm were 83.9% and 83.8%.ConclusionCompared to colonoscopy, CT-colonography has a high sensitivity for adenomas ≥ 10 mm. For (advanced) adenomas ≥ 6 mm sensitivity is somewhat lower.

Patients preferred CT colonography to colonoscopy; however, this preference decreased in time, while outcome considerations gradually replaced temporary experiences of inconvenience.

Although image quality decreases significantly at 30 mAs (3.6 mSv), polyp detection remains unimpaired. The median dose for CT colonography at institutions that perform CT colonographic research is currently 8.8 mSv.

The authors compared a conventional two-directional three-dimensional (3D) display for computed tomography (CT) colonography with an alternative method they developed on the basis of time efficiency and surface visibility. With the conventional technique, 3D ante- and retrograde cine loops were obtained (hereafter, conventional 3D). With the alternative method, six projections were obtained at 90 degrees viewing angles (unfolded cube display). Mean evaluation time per patient with the conventional 3D display was significantly longer than that with the unfolded cube display. With the conventional 3D method, 93.8% of the colon surface came into view; with the unfolded cube method, 99.5% of the colon surface came into view. Sensitivity and specificity were not significantly different between the two methods. Agreements between observers were kappa = 0.605 for conventional 3D display and kappa = 0.692 for unfolded cube display. Consequently, the latter method enhances the 3D endoluminal display with improved time efficiency and higher surface visibility.

The purpose was to evaluate low-dose CT colonography without cathartic cleansing in terms of image quality, polyp visualization and patient acceptance. Sixty-one patients scheduled for colonoscopy started a low-fiber diet, lactulose and amidotrizoic-acid for fecal tagging 2 days prior to the CTscan (standard dose, 5.8-8.2 mSv). The original raw data of 51 patients were modified and reconstructed at simulated 2.3 and 0.7 mSv levels. Two observers evaluated the standard dose scan regarding image quality and polyps. A third evaluated the presence of polyps at all three mSv levels in a blinded prospective way. All observers were blinded to the reference standard: colonoscopy. At three times patients were given questionnaires relating to their experiences and preference. Image quality was sufficient in all patients, but significantly lower in the cecum, sigmoid and rectum. The two observers correctly identified respectively 10/15 (67%) and 9/15 (60%) polyps ≥10 mm, with 5 and 8 false-positive lesions (standard dose scan). Dose reduction down to 0.7 mSv was not associated with significant changes in diagnostic value (polyps ≥10 mm). Eighty percent of patients preferred CT colonography and 13% preferred colonoscopy (P<0.001). CT colonography without cleansing is preferred to colonoscopy and shows sufficient image quality and moderate sensitivity, without impaired diagnostic value at dose-levels as low as 0.7 mSv.

In a feasibility study, the authors compared polyp detection and interobserver variability at computed tomographic (CT) colonography in 15 patients with doses ranging from medium to very low (12.00-0.05 mSv). At levels down to 2% of the medium dose, the mean detection of polyps 5 mm or larger remained at least 74%, while the number of false-positive results decreased and the interobserver agreement remained constant. Initial observations indicate that it is feasible to reduce the radiation dose required for CT colonography. Further studies are needed, however, to investigate the clinical value of very low-dose CT colonography.