Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 3/2008

01-03-2008 | Gastrointestinal

Comparison of MR enteroclysis with MR enterography and conventional enteroclysis in patients with Crohn’s disease

Authors: Gabriele Masselli, Emanuele Casciani, Elisabetta Polettini, Gianfranco Gualdi

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 3/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

To prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of MR enteroclysis with duodenal intubation with MRI after drinking oral contrast agent only (MR enterography) with conventional enteroclysis (conv-E) as reference standard in patients with Crohn’s disease. Forty consecutive patients (22 males and 18 females; mean age 36; range 16–74 years) with proven Crohn’s disease underwent conv-E and MR imaging. Twenty-two patients underwent MR enteroclysis with intubation (MRE) and 18 underwent MR-enterography (MR per OS). Two radiologists reached a consensus about the following imaging findings: luminal distension and visualization of superficial mucosal, mural and mesenteric abnormalities. Standard descriptive statistics and a Wilcoxon rank sum test were used. Statistical significance was inferred at P < 0.05. There was no significant difference in the adequacy of luminal distention between the MRE and conv-E (P = 0.08), and both were statistically superior in comparison to MR per OS in the distension of the jejunum (P < 0.01) and less significant at the ileum and terminal ileum levels (P < 0.05). MRE and conv-E were comparable for the accuracy of superficial mucosal abnormalities; meanwhile conv-E compared with MR per OS was statistically superior (P < 0.01). MRE compared with MR per OS was statistically better when visualizing superficial abnormalities (P < 0.01). No statistically significant differences were found in assessing the diagnostic efficacy between MR examinations for the depiction of mural stenosis (P = 0.105) and fistulae (P = 0.67). The number of detected mesenteric findings was significantly higher with both MRE and MR per OS compared to conv-E (P < 0.01). MRE can serve as the diagnostic procedure for initially evaluating patients suspected of having Crohn’s disease. MR per OS may have a role in patients that refuse or have failed intubation and also for follow-up.
Literature
1.
2.
go back to reference Furukawa A, Saotome T, Yamasaki M, Maeda K, Nitta N, Takahashi M, Tsujikawa T, Fujiyama Y, Murata K, Sakamoto T (2004) Cross-sectional Imaging in Crohn’s disease. Radiographics 24:689–702PubMedCrossRef Furukawa A, Saotome T, Yamasaki M, Maeda K, Nitta N, Takahashi M, Tsujikawa T, Fujiyama Y, Murata K, Sakamoto T (2004) Cross-sectional Imaging in Crohn’s disease. Radiographics 24:689–702PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Gourtsoyiannis N, Papanikolaou N, Grammatikakis J, Prassopoulos P (2002) MR enteroclysis: technical considerations and clinical applications. Eur Radiol 12(11):2651–2658PubMed Gourtsoyiannis N, Papanikolaou N, Grammatikakis J, Prassopoulos P (2002) MR enteroclysis: technical considerations and clinical applications. Eur Radiol 12(11):2651–2658PubMed
4.
go back to reference Masselli G, Brizi MG, Parrella A, Minordi L, Vecchioli A, Marano P (2004) Crohn’s disease: magnetic resonance enteroclysis. Abdom imaging 29:326–334PubMedCrossRef Masselli G, Brizi MG, Parrella A, Minordi L, Vecchioli A, Marano P (2004) Crohn’s disease: magnetic resonance enteroclysis. Abdom imaging 29:326–334PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Umschaden HW, Szolar D, Gasser J, Umschaden M, Haselbach H (2000) Small bowel disease: comparison of MR enteroclysis images with conventional enteroclysis and surgical findings. Radiology 215:717–725PubMed Umschaden HW, Szolar D, Gasser J, Umschaden M, Haselbach H (2000) Small bowel disease: comparison of MR enteroclysis images with conventional enteroclysis and surgical findings. Radiology 215:717–725PubMed
6.
go back to reference Maglinte DT, Siegelman ES, Kelvin FM (2000) MR enteroclysis: the future of small-bowel imaging? Radiology 215(3):639–641PubMed Maglinte DT, Siegelman ES, Kelvin FM (2000) MR enteroclysis: the future of small-bowel imaging? Radiology 215(3):639–641PubMed
7.
go back to reference Best WR, Becktel JM, Singleton JW (1979) Rederived values of the eight coefficients of the Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI). Gastroenterology 77(4 Pt 2):843–846PubMed Best WR, Becktel JM, Singleton JW (1979) Rederived values of the eight coefficients of the Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI). Gastroenterology 77(4 Pt 2):843–846PubMed
8.
go back to reference Barkun A, Chiba N, Enns R, Marcon M, Natsheh S, Pham C, Sadowski D, Vanner S (2006) Commonly used preparations for colonoscopy: efficacy, tolerability, and safety—a Canadian association of gastroenterology position paper. Can J Gastroenterol 20(11):699–710PubMed Barkun A, Chiba N, Enns R, Marcon M, Natsheh S, Pham C, Sadowski D, Vanner S (2006) Commonly used preparations for colonoscopy: efficacy, tolerability, and safety—a Canadian association of gastroenterology position paper. Can J Gastroenterol 20(11):699–710PubMed
9.
go back to reference Sood RR, Joubert I, Franklin H, Doyle T, Lomas DJ (2002) Small bowel MRI: comparison of a polyethylene glycol preparation and water as oral contrast media. J Magn Reson Imaging 15:401–408PubMedCrossRef Sood RR, Joubert I, Franklin H, Doyle T, Lomas DJ (2002) Small bowel MRI: comparison of a polyethylene glycol preparation and water as oral contrast media. J Magn Reson Imaging 15:401–408PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Laghi A, Carbone I, Catalano C, Iannaccone R, Paolantonio P, Baeli I, Trenna S, Passariello R (2001) Polyethylenglycol solution as an oral contrast agent for MR imaging of the small bowel. AJR 177:1333–1334PubMed Laghi A, Carbone I, Catalano C, Iannaccone R, Paolantonio P, Baeli I, Trenna S, Passariello R (2001) Polyethylenglycol solution as an oral contrast agent for MR imaging of the small bowel. AJR 177:1333–1334PubMed
11.
go back to reference Maglinte DD, Lappas JC, Heitkamp DE, Bender GN, Kelvin FM (2003) Technical refinements in enteroclysis. Radiol Clin N Am 41:213–229PubMedCrossRef Maglinte DD, Lappas JC, Heitkamp DE, Bender GN, Kelvin FM (2003) Technical refinements in enteroclysis. Radiol Clin N Am 41:213–229PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Wills JS, Lobis IF, Denstman FJ (1997) Crohn disease: state of the art. Radiology 202:597–610PubMed Wills JS, Lobis IF, Denstman FJ (1997) Crohn disease: state of the art. Radiology 202:597–610PubMed
13.
go back to reference Cirillo LC, Camera L, Della Noce M, Castiglione F, Mazzacca G, Salvatore M (2000) Accuracy of enteroclysis in Crohn’s disease of the small bowel: a retrospective study. Eur Radiol 10(12):1894–1898PubMedCrossRef Cirillo LC, Camera L, Della Noce M, Castiglione F, Mazzacca G, Salvatore M (2000) Accuracy of enteroclysis in Crohn’s disease of the small bowel: a retrospective study. Eur Radiol 10(12):1894–1898PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Herlinger H, Maglinte D (1989) Clinical radiology of the small intestine. Saunders, Philadelphia, Pa Herlinger H, Maglinte D (1989) Clinical radiology of the small intestine. Saunders, Philadelphia, Pa
15.
go back to reference Schreyer Ag, Geissler A, Albrich H, Scholmerich J, Feuerbach S, Rogler G, Volk M, Herfath H (2004) Abdominal MRI after enteroclysis or with oral contrast in patients with suspected or proven Crohn’s disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2(6):491–497PubMedCrossRef Schreyer Ag, Geissler A, Albrich H, Scholmerich J, Feuerbach S, Rogler G, Volk M, Herfath H (2004) Abdominal MRI after enteroclysis or with oral contrast in patients with suspected or proven Crohn’s disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2(6):491–497PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Negaard A, Paulsen V, Sandvik L, Berstard AE, Borthne A, Try K, Lygren I, Storaas T, Klow NE (2007) A prospective randomized comparison between two MRI studies of the small bowel in Crohn’s disease, the oral contrast and MR enteroclysis. Eur Radiol epub 05052007 Negaard A, Paulsen V, Sandvik L, Berstard AE, Borthne A, Try K, Lygren I, Storaas T, Klow NE (2007) A prospective randomized comparison between two MRI studies of the small bowel in Crohn’s disease, the oral contrast and MR enteroclysis. Eur Radiol epub 05052007
17.
go back to reference Wold PB, Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Sandborn WJ (2003) Assessment of small bowel crohn disease:non-invasive peroral CT enterography compared with other imaging methods and endoscopy-feasibility study. Radiology 229:275–281PubMedCrossRef Wold PB, Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Sandborn WJ (2003) Assessment of small bowel crohn disease:non-invasive peroral CT enterography compared with other imaging methods and endoscopy-feasibility study. Radiology 229:275–281PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Maglinte DD (2006) Invited commentary. Radiographics 26:657–662 Maglinte DD (2006) Invited commentary. Radiographics 26:657–662
19.
go back to reference Gourtsoyiannis NC, Grammatikakis J, Papamastorakis G, Koutroumbakis J, Prassopoulos P, Rousomoustakaki M, Papanikolaou N (2006) Imaging of small intestinal Crohn’s disease: comparison between MR enteroclysis and conventional enteroclysis. Eur Radiol 16(9):1915–1925PubMedCrossRef Gourtsoyiannis NC, Grammatikakis J, Papamastorakis G, Koutroumbakis J, Prassopoulos P, Rousomoustakaki M, Papanikolaou N (2006) Imaging of small intestinal Crohn’s disease: comparison between MR enteroclysis and conventional enteroclysis. Eur Radiol 16(9):1915–1925PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Masselli G, Casciani E, Polettini E, Lanciotti S, Bertini L, Gualdi G (2006) Assessment of Crohn’s disease in the small bowel: prospective comparison of magnetic resonance enteroclysis with conventional enteroclysis. Eur Radiol 16(12):2817–2827PubMedCrossRef Masselli G, Casciani E, Polettini E, Lanciotti S, Bertini L, Gualdi G (2006) Assessment of Crohn’s disease in the small bowel: prospective comparison of magnetic resonance enteroclysis with conventional enteroclysis. Eur Radiol 16(12):2817–2827PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Albert JG, Martiny F, Krummenerl A, Stock K, Lesske J, Gobel CM, Lotterer E, Nietsch HH, Behrmann C, Fleig WE (2005) Diagnosis of small bowel Crohn’s disease: a prospective comparison of capsule endoscopy with magnetic resonance imaging and fluoroscopic enteroclysis. Gut 54:1721–1727PubMedCrossRef Albert JG, Martiny F, Krummenerl A, Stock K, Lesske J, Gobel CM, Lotterer E, Nietsch HH, Behrmann C, Fleig WE (2005) Diagnosis of small bowel Crohn’s disease: a prospective comparison of capsule endoscopy with magnetic resonance imaging and fluoroscopic enteroclysis. Gut 54:1721–1727PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Golder SK, Schreyer AG, Endlicher E, Feuerbach S, Scholmerich J, Kullmann F, Seitz J, Rogler G, Herfarth H (2006) Comparison of capsule endoscopy and magnetic resonance (MR) enteroclysis in suspected small bowel disease. Int J Colorectal Dis 21(2):97–104, MarPubMedCrossRef Golder SK, Schreyer AG, Endlicher E, Feuerbach S, Scholmerich J, Kullmann F, Seitz J, Rogler G, Herfarth H (2006) Comparison of capsule endoscopy and magnetic resonance (MR) enteroclysis in suspected small bowel disease. Int J Colorectal Dis 21(2):97–104, MarPubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Hara AK, Leighton JA, Sharma VK, Heigh RI, Fleischer DE (2006 ) Imaging of small bowel disease: comparison of capsule endoscopy, standard endoscopy, barium examination, and CT. Radiology 238(1):128–134PubMedCrossRef Hara AK, Leighton JA, Sharma VK, Heigh RI, Fleischer DE (2006 ) Imaging of small bowel disease: comparison of capsule endoscopy, standard endoscopy, barium examination, and CT. Radiology 238(1):128–134PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Mackalski BA, Berstein CN (2006) New diagnostic imaging tools for inflammatory bowel disease. Gut 55:733–741PubMedCrossRef Mackalski BA, Berstein CN (2006) New diagnostic imaging tools for inflammatory bowel disease. Gut 55:733–741PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Masselli G, Brizi MG, Menchini L, Minordi L, Vecchioli A (2005) Magnetic resonance enteroclysis imaging of Crohn’s. Radiol Med 110(3):221–233 Masselli G, Brizi MG, Menchini L, Minordi L, Vecchioli A (2005) Magnetic resonance enteroclysis imaging of Crohn’s. Radiol Med 110(3):221–233
27.
go back to reference Prassopoulos P, Papanikolau N, Grammatikakis J, Rousomoustakaki M, Maris T, Gourtsoyiannis N (2001) MR enteroclysis imaging of Crohn’s disease. Radiographics 21:161–172 Prassopoulos P, Papanikolau N, Grammatikakis J, Rousomoustakaki M, Maris T, Gourtsoyiannis N (2001) MR enteroclysis imaging of Crohn’s disease. Radiographics 21:161–172
28.
go back to reference Koh DM, Miao Y, Chinn RJ, Amin Z, Zeegen R, Westaby D, Healy JC (2001) MR imaging evaluation of the activity in Crohn’s disaese. AJR 177:1325–1332PubMed Koh DM, Miao Y, Chinn RJ, Amin Z, Zeegen R, Westaby D, Healy JC (2001) MR imaging evaluation of the activity in Crohn’s disaese. AJR 177:1325–1332PubMed
29.
go back to reference Maccioni F, Bruni A, Viscido, Colaiacomo MC, Cocco A, Montesani C, Caprilli R, Marini M (2006) MR imaging in patients with Crohn disease:value of T2-versus T1-weighted gadolinium enhanced MR sequences with use of an oral supermagnetic contrast agent. Radiology 238(2):517–530PubMedCrossRef Maccioni F, Bruni A, Viscido, Colaiacomo MC, Cocco A, Montesani C, Caprilli R, Marini M (2006) MR imaging in patients with Crohn disease:value of T2-versus T1-weighted gadolinium enhanced MR sequences with use of an oral supermagnetic contrast agent. Radiology 238(2):517–530PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of MR enteroclysis with MR enterography and conventional enteroclysis in patients with Crohn’s disease
Authors
Gabriele Masselli
Emanuele Casciani
Elisabetta Polettini
Gianfranco Gualdi
Publication date
01-03-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 3/2008
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0763-2

Other articles of this Issue 3/2008

European Radiology 3/2008 Go to the issue