Feasibility of evaluating Crohn's disease activity at 3.0 Tesla

Purpose To determine whether abdominal 3.0T MRI can be used for evaluation of Crohn's disease (CD) compared with ileocolonoscopy (CS), and to determine patient preference for MRI as opposed to CS. Materials and Methods Twenty patients scheduled for CS underwent MRI. At CS, disease severity was...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of magnetic resonance imaging 2006-08, Vol.24 (2), p.340-348
Main Authors: van Gemert-Horsthuis, Karin, Florie, Jasper, Hommes, Daniel W., Lavini MPhil, Cristina, Reitsma, Johannes B., van Deventer, Sander J., Stoker, Jaap
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
3.0 Tesla
abdominal MRI
Adult
bowel
Colonoscopy
Contrast Media
Crohn Disease - diagnosis
Crohn's disease
Diagnosis, Differential
disease activity
Feasibility Studies
Female
Gadolinium DTPA
Humans
Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods
Male
Middle Aged
Prospective Studies
Statistics, Nonparametric
Surveys and Questionnaires
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose To determine whether abdominal 3.0T MRI can be used for evaluation of Crohn's disease (CD) compared with ileocolonoscopy (CS), and to determine patient preference for MRI as opposed to CS. Materials and Methods Twenty patients scheduled for CS underwent MRI. At CS, disease severity was graded and the Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) was determined. Radiological grading (by two observers) was compared with endoscopic grading and CDEIS. Patient experience and preference were determined. Results In respectively 10 (observer 1) and 13 patients (observer 2) exact agreement between radiological and endoscopic grading was found. In respectively 10 and 7 patients radiological and endoscopic grading differed one level. No statistically significant correlation was found between radiological grading and CDEIS. Between bowel wall thickness and CDEIS weak to moderate correlations were found, and between bowel wall enhancement and CDEIS weak correlations were found. All patients preferred MRI over CS. Conclusion It is feasible to perform abdominal 3.0T MRI using orally administered contrast medium for evaluation of CD, and this method can be considered a patient‐friendly alternative to CS. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2006. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
ISSN:1053-1807
1522-2586
DOI:10.1002/jmri.20650