[avitot]

ct colonograghy prep is easier and there are studies underway for new technique that doesn't require the laxative. instead people drink a barium based liquid that the computer can then use to distinguish poop from polyp making it much more palatable.the polyp pick up rate is equivalent-however you cant biopsy an image so the positive studies than go to conventional scope-but consider that there is a .1% perforation rate with scoping, and a high rate of incomplete exam(they couldn't get all the way though) it makes sense to start with ct. also when they can'tget all the way through, ct can finish the diagnostic job.

[SFConservative]

Thanks for the info. I assume that the CT approach is also cheaper, though it carries some probability of having to pay the cost of colonoscopy anyway if positive. So is there a logic here that says without history of problems, start and monitor with CT, and with history of problems, go directly to and periodically repeat colonoscopy?