title: Efficacy of barium-based fecal tagging for CT colonography: a comparison between the use of high and low density barium suspensions in a Korean population - a preliminary study.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  This preliminarily study was designed to determine and to compare the efficacy of two commercially available barium-based fecal tagging agents for CT colonography (CTC) (high-density [40% w/v] and low-density [4.6% w/v] barium suspensions) in a population in Korea.
  
  
  METHODS
  In a population with an identified with an average-risk for colorectal cancer, 15 adults were administered three doses of 20 ml 40% w/v barium for fecal tagging (group I) and 15 adults were administered three doses of 200 ml 4.6% w/v barium (group II) for fecal tagging. Excluding five patients in group I and one patient in group II that left the study, ten patients in group I and 14 patients in group II were finally included in the analysis. Two experienced readers evaluated the CTC images in consensus regarding the degree of tagging of stool pieces 6 mm or larger. Stool pieces were confirmed with the use of standardized CTC criteria or the absence of matched lesions as seen on colonoscopy. The rates of complete fecal tagging were analyzed on a per-lesion and a per-segment basis and were compared between the patients in the two groups.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Per-lesion rates of complete fecal tagging were 52% (22 of 42; 95% CI, 37.7-66.6%) in group I and 78% (28 of 36; 95% CI, 61.7-88.5%) in group II. The difference between the two groups did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.285). The per-segment rates of complete tagging were 33% (6 of 18; 95% CI, 16.1%-56.4%) in group I and 60% (9 of 15; 95% CI, 35.7%-80.3%) in group II; again, the difference between the two groups did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.171).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Barium-based fecal tagging using both the 40% w/v and the 4.6% w/v barium suspensions showed moderate tagging efficacy. The preliminary comparison did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the tagging efficacy between the use of the two tagging agents, despite the tendency toward better tagging with the use of the 4.6% w/v barium suspension.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology and Internal Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
authors.forename: Min Ju
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Seong Ho
authors.initials: SH
authors.lastname: Park
authors.forename: Seung Soo
authors.initials: SS
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Jeong Sik
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Byeon
authors.forename: Eugene K
authors.initials: EK
authors.lastname: Choi
authors.forename: Jung Hoon
authors.initials: JH
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Yeoung Nam
authors.initials: YN
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Ah Young
authors.initials: AY
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Hyun Kwon
authors.initials: HK
authors.lastname: Ha
mesh_terms: D000284:Administration, Oral; D000328:Adult; D001464:Barium / Q000008:administration & dosage; D003106:Colon / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D023881:Colonography, Computed Tomographic / Q000379:methods; D003113:Colonoscopy; D015179:Colorectal Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D003287:Contrast Media / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D005243:Feces; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D013535:Suspensions
chemical_list: D003287:Contrast Media; D013535:Suspensions; D001464:Barium