Dear AuntMinnie Insider,
It turns out virtual colonoscopy did all right in 2005.
No, U.S. providers won't be waking up December 25 to find VC screening payments in their, um, holiday stockings. There is little chance of a national coverage decision permitting such reimbursement under Medicare pending the ACRIN 6664 CT colonography trial results expected over the next few years.
But proponents of the virtual exam, by thinking globally and acting locally, have secured payment across much of the U.S. for some of their nearest and dearest VC indications. As of this month, providers in 29 states have approved reimbursement for indications ranging from VC after failed colonoscopy to VC in patients at risk of bleeding. More are on the way, and some private insurers are coming on board too.
Today's Insider Exclusive takes an in-depth look at the state of VC reimbursement today. Our story includes comments by two noted VC providers, Dr. Matthew Barish and Dr. Elizabeth McFarland, and features a special pop-up reimbursement chart created by the American College of Radiology's Kathryn Keysor especially for AuntMinnie members.
Simply scroll through the stories below for more important news about virtual colonoscopy and colorectal cancer, including a study by Dr. Emanuele Neri that looked for vasovagal reactions in VC patients.
Also, be sure to stop back on Wednesday to read about a VC CAD system that did nearly as well as conventional colonoscopy in detecting significant lesions in a screening population -- all in your Virtual Colonoscopy Digital Community.
![Axial images from unenhanced calcium score cardiac CT (left) and curved planar reformation images from CT angiography (right) show that higher long-term exposure to air pollution is associated with greater coronary artery calcium and more obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Top row: Images in a 68-year-old male patient with higher 10-year mean ambient air pollution exposure (7.9 μg/m3 for particulate matter measuring ≤2.5 μm in diameter [PM2.5] and 17.4 parts per billion [ppb] for NO2) with extensive CAD (coronary artery calcium score [CACS] >1,000 and obstructive CAD [≥70% diameter stenosis]). Bottom row: Images in a 57-year-old female patient with lower 10-year mean ambient air pollution exposure (6.3 μg/m3 for PM2.5 and 4.6 ppb for NO2) with no CAD (CACS = 0 and no obstructive stenosis).](https://img.auntminnie.com/mindful/smg/workspaces/default/uploads/2026/06/hanneman.r6SMLzkezo.png?auto=format%2Ccompress&dpr=2&fit=crop&h=167&q=70&w=250)
