The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparison of Virtual and Conventional Colonoscopy for the Detection of Colorectal Polyps
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Virtual colonoscopy is a new method of imaging the colon in which thin-section, helical computed tomography (CT) is used to generate high-resolution, two-dimensional axial images. Three-dimensional images of the colon simulating those obtained with conventional colonoscopy are then reconstructed off-line. We compared the performance of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. METHODS: We prospectively studied 100 patients at high risk for colorectal neoplasia (60 men and 40 women; mean age, 62 years). We performed virtual colonoscopy immediately before conventional colonoscopy. We inserted a rectal tube and insufflated the colon with air to the maximal level that the patient could tolerate. We administered 1 mg of glucagon intravenously immediately before CT scanning to minimize the degree of smooth-muscle spasm and peristalsis and to reduce the patient's discomfort. RESULTS: The entire colon was clearly seen by virtual colonoscopy in 87 patients and by conventional colonoscopy in 89. Fifty-one patients had normal findings on conventional colonoscopy. In the other 49, we identified a total of 115 polyps and 3 carcinomas. Virtual colonoscopy identified all 3 cancers, 20 of 22 polyps that were 10 mm or more in diameter (91 percent), 33 of 40 that were 6 to 9 mm (82 percent), and 29 of 53 that were 5 mm or smaller (55 percent). There were 19 false positive findings of polyps and no false positive findings of cancer. Of the 69 adenomatous polyps, 46 of the 51 that were 6 mm or more in diameter (90 percent) and 12 of the 18 that were 5 mm or smaller (67 percent) were correctly identified by virtual colonoscopy. Although discomfort was not specifically recorded, none of the patients requested that virtual colonoscopy be stopped because of discomfort or pain. CONCLUSIONS: In a group of patients at high risk for colorectal neoplasia, virtual and conventional colonoscopy had similar efficacy for the detection of polyps that were 6 mm or more in diameter.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prevention of Colorectal Cancer by Colonoscopic Polypectomy
Winawer, S. J., Zauber, A. G., Ho, M. N., O'Brien, M. J., Gottlieb, L. S., Sternberg, S. S., Waye, J. D., Schapiro, M., Bond, J. H., Panish, J. F., et al. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199312303292701 · Cited by 4,592
Reducing Mortality from Colorectal Cancer by Screening for Fecal Occult Blood
Mandel, J. S., Bond, J. H., Church, T. R., Snover, D. C., Bradley, G. M., Schuman, L. M., & Ederer, F. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199305133281901 · Cited by 3,229
Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer
Hardcastle, J. D., Chamberlain, J. O., Robinson, M. H., Moss, S. M., Amar, S. S., Balfour, T. W., James, P. D., & Mangham, C. M. (1996) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(96)03386-7 · Cited by 2,793
Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test
Kronborg, O., Fenger, C., Olsen, J., Jørgensen, O. D., & Søndergaard, O. (1996) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(96)03430-7 · Cited by 2,501
A Case–Control Study of Screening Sigmoidoscopy and Mortality from Colorectal Cancer
Selby, J. V., Friedman, G. D., Quesenberry, C. P., & Weiss, N. S. (1992) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199203053261001 · Cited by 1,702
Colorectal cancer screening: Clinical guidelines and rationale
Winawer, S., Fletcher, R., Miller, L., Godlee, F., Stolar, M., Mulrow, C., Woolf, S., Glick, S., Ganiats, T., Bond, J., et al. (1997) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/gast.1997.v112.agast970594 · Cited by 1,612
Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies
Rex, D., Cutler, C., Lemmel, G., Rahmani, E., Clark, D., Helper, D., Lehman, G., & Mark, D. (1997) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1016/s0016-5085(97)70214-2 · Cited by 1,553
Natural history of untreated colonic polyps
Stryker, S. J., Wolff, B. G., Culp, C. E., Libbe, S. D., Ilstrup, D. M., & MacCarty, R. L. (1987) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1016/0016-5085(87)90563-4 · Cited by 939
Screening Sigmoidoscopy and Colorectal Cancer Mortality
Newcomb, P. A., Norfleet, R. G., Storer, B. E., Surawicz, T. S., & Marcus, P. M. (1992) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/84.20.1572 · Cited by 911
Perspective volume rendering of CT and MR images: applications for endoscopic imaging.
Rubin, G. D., Beaulieu, C. F., Argiro, V., Ringl, H., Norbash, A., Feller, J. F., Dake, M. D., Jeffrey, R. B., & Napel, S. A. (1996) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.199.2.8668772 · Cited by 397
Cited by
WINAWER, S. (2003) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/gast.2003.50044 · Cited by 2,143
CT Colonography Reporting and Data System: A Consensus Proposal
Zalis, M. E., Barish, M. A., Choi, J. R., Dachman, A. H., Fenlon, H. M., Ferrucci, J. T., Glick, S. N., Laghi, A., Macari, M., McFarland, E. G., et al. (2005) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2361041926 · Cited by 608
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Fenlon, H. M., Nunes, D. P., Schroy, P. C., Barish, M. A., Clarke, P. D., & Ferrucci, J. T.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1999-11-11
- Volume
- 341
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 1496-1503
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W1976975876
- Cited by
- 746
- References
- 20
- FWCI
- 24.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Comparison of Virtual and Conventional Colonoscopy for the Detection of Colorectal Polyps. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199911113412003
- The paper
- Fenlon, H. M., Nunes, D. P., Schroy, P. C., Barish, M. A., Clarke, P. D., & Ferrucci, J. T. (1999). A Comparison of Virtual and Conventional Colonoscopy for the Detection of Colorectal Polyps. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199911113412003
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.