Dataset Information

Diagnosis of small bowel Crohn's disease: a prospective comparison of capsule endoscopy with magnetic resonance imaging and fluoroscopic enteroclysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aims

The diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy (CE) compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in small bowel Crohn's disease is not well established. We prospectively investigated CE, MRI, and double contrast fluoroscopy in patients with suspected small bowel Crohn's disease.

Methods

Fifty two consecutive patients (39 females, 13 males) were investigated by MRI, fluoroscopy and--if bowel obstruction could be excluded--by CE. In 25, Crohn's disease was newly suspected while the diagnosis of Crohn's disease (non-small bowel) had been previously established in 27.

Results

Small bowel Crohn's disease was diagnosed in 41 of 52 patients (79%). CE was not accomplished in 14 patients due to bowel strictures. Of the remaining 27 patients, CE, MRI, and fluoroscopy detected small bowel Crohn's disease in 25 (93%), 21 (78%), and 7 (of 21; 33%) cases, respectively. CE was the only diagnostic tool in four patients. CE was slightly more sensitive than MRI (12 v 10 of 13 in suspected Crohn's disease and 13 v 11 of 14 in established Crohn's disease). MRI detected inflammatory conglomerates and enteric fistulae in three and two cases, respectively.

Conclusion

CE and MRI are complementary methods for diagnosing small bowel Crohn's disease. CE is capable of detecting limited mucosal lesions that may be missed by MRI, but awareness of bowel obstruction is mandatory. In contrast, MRI is helpful in identifying transmural Crohn's disease and extraluminal lesions, and may exclude strictures.

SUBMITTER: Albert JG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1774782 | biostudies-literature | 2005 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Diagnosis of small bowel Crohn's disease: a prospective comparison of capsule endoscopy with magnetic resonance imaging and fluoroscopic enteroclysis.

Albert J G JG Martiny F F Krummenerl A A Stock K K Lesske J J Göbel C M CM Lotterer E E Nietsch H H HH Behrmann C C Fleig W E WE

Gut 20050714 12

<h4>Background and aims</h4>The diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy (CE) compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in small bowel Crohn's disease is not well established. We prospectively investigated CE, MRI, and double contrast fluoroscopy in patients with suspected small bowel Crohn's disease.<h4>Methods</h4>Fifty two consecutive patients (39 females, 13 males) were investigated by MRI, fluoroscopy and--if bowel obstruction could be excluded--by CE. In 25, Crohn's disease was newly sus ...[more]

PMID: 16020490

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMagnetic resonance enterography (MRE) and wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) are equally accepted modalities for noninvasive screening of small bowel involvement (SBI) in children with Crohn's disease (CD) and indeterminate colitis (IC) albeit there is a paucity of data comparing the two and thereby guiding the clinician in selecting the ideal diagnostic approach. Therefore, the goal of this study is to provide additional evidence for capsule endoscopy role in the evaluation of established Crohn's disease exacerbation compared to MRE in relation to Pediatric Crohn's Disease Activity Index (PCDAI), and histological indices.AimTo prospectively compare the findings of MRE and WCE and their agreement with PCDAI or histology in children with CD or IC.MethodsConsecutive patients diagnosed with CD and IC were screened for inclusion. After informed consent, patient's demographic and clinical data was abstracted. The current pediatric disease activity index (PCDAI) and endoscopic findings were included. Patients underwent MRE and WCE including preprocedural patency capsule within a maximum of 7 d of each other. Pathological presence of active small bowel disease in ileal and duodenal biopsies were collected if the endoscopy was performed within 2 mo of the WCE study. Patients who failed to pass the PC were excluded from the study. WCE was read by two different experienced gastroenterologists (Attard TM and Colombo JM) blinded to each other's findings and to the findings on MRE (Mardis NJ). Agreement between WCE reviewers, WCE and MRE findings and concordance between positive PCDAI and SBI based on MRE compared with WCE was computed.ResultsForty-five patients were included in the study, 18 withdrew and 27 (20 males and 20 CD), mean age (standard deviation) 13.46 (2.4) years, completed the study protocol. There were no instances of capsule retention. Concordance between gastroenterologist reviewers was excellent for the diagnosis of small intestinal CD with good correlation between the two Lewis scores (r = 0.875, P < 0.001). Concordance between WCE and MRE was poor (69%). In CD patients, when both MRE and WCE were compared using PCDAI > 10 as the standard reference reflecting active small intestinal CD, the sensitivity of MRE and WCE were 100% and 83% respectively and the specificity of MRE and WCE were 57.14% and 78.6%, respectively. If the histology in ileum or/and duodenum was used as the reference for active small bowel involvement, WCE had a higher specificity as compared to MRE (83.3% vs 50%). In patients with Crohn's disease, those with a positive PCDAI (> 10) were more likely to have a positive WCE as compared to those with a negative PCDAI (83% vs 21%; P = 0.018).ConclusionWe suggest that MRE and WCE have a complementary role in the assessment of SBI in CD. WCE detected SBI with a much higher specificity while MRE had a higher sensitivity.

Dataset Information

Diagnosis of small bowel Crohn's disease: a prospective comparison of capsule endoscopy with magnetic resonance imaging and fluoroscopic enteroclysis.

Background and aims

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Diagnosis of small bowel Crohn's disease: a prospective comparison of capsule endoscopy with magnetic resonance imaging and fluoroscopic enteroclysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets