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.
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.
Authors: Ivo L Partecke; André Kaeding; Matthias Sendler; Nele Albers; Jens-P Kühn; Sven Speerforck; Sebastian Roese; Florian Seubert; Stephan Diedrich; Sandra Kuehn; Ulrich F Weiss; Julia Mayerle; Markus M Lerch; Stefan Hadlich; Norbert Hosten; Claus-D Heidecke; Ralf Puls; Wolfram von Bernstorff Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2011-01-28 Impact factor: 4.430