Literature DB >> 26599801

Diagnosis of Small-Bowel Diseases: Prospective Comparison of Multi-Detector Row CT Enterography with MR Enterography.

Gabriele Masselli1, Marco Di Tola1, Emanuele Casciani1, Elisabetta Polettini1, Francesca Laghi1, Riccardo Monti1, Maria Giulia Bernieri1, Gianfranco Gualdi1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the accuracies of computed tomographic (CT) enterography and magnetic resonance (MR) enterography for the detection and characterization of small-bowel diseases.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved the study protocol, and informed consent was obtained from all participants. From June 2009 to July 2013, 150 consecutive patients (81 men and 69 women; mean age, 38.8 years; range, 18-74 years), who were suspected of having a small-bowel disease on the basis of clinical findings and whose previous upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy findings were normal, underwent CT and MR enterography. Two independent readers reviewed CT and MR enterographic images for the presence of small-bowel diseases, for differentiating between inflammatory and noninflammatory diseases, and for extraenteric complications. The histopathologic findings of surgical (n = 23) and endoscopic (n = 32) biopsy specimens were used as the reference standard; the results of video-capsule endoscopy (n = 36) and clinical follow-up (n = 59) were used only to confirm the absence of small-bowel disease.
RESULTS: MR and CT enterography were successfully performed in all 150 patients. Overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, respectively, in identifying patients with small-bowel lesions were 75.9% (41 of 54), 94.8% (91 of 96), and 88.0% (132 of 150) for CT enterography and 92.6% (50 of 54), 99.0% (95 of 96), and 96.7% (145 of 150) for MR enterography. The sensitivity of MR enterography was significantly higher than that of CT enterography for the detection of both overall small-bowel diseases (P = .0159) and neoplastic diseases (P = .0412) but not for the detection of inflammatory diseases (P > .99) or noninflammatory and nonneoplastic diseases (P = .6171).
CONCLUSION: MR enterography is more accurate than CT enterography in the detection of small-bowel diseases; MR enterography was more accurate in detecting neoplastic diseases in particular. (©) RSNA, 2015 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26599801     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2015150263

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  10 in total

Review 1.  The Surgical Management of Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors: Consensus Guidelines of the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society.

Authors:  James R Howe; Kenneth Cardona; Douglas L Fraker; Electron Kebebew; Brian R Untch; Yi-Zarn Wang; Calvin H Law; Eric H Liu; Michelle K Kim; Yusuf Menda; Brian G Morse; Emily K Bergsland; Jonathan R Strosberg; Eric K Nakakura; Rodney F Pommier
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 3.327

Review 2.  Epidemiology, Risk Factors and Diagnosis of Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Thomas Aparicio; Atanas Pachev; Pierre Laurent-Puig; Magali Svrcek
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-02       Impact factor: 6.575

3.  Comparison of patients' tolerance between computed tomography enterography and double-balloon enteroscopy.

Authors:  Maochen Zhang; Tianyu Zhang; Liwen Hong; Qiangqiang Wu; Yun Lin; Mengfan Xie; Rong Fan; Zhengting Wang; Jie Zhou; Jie Zhong
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 2.711

4.  The combination of a reduction in contrast agent dose with low tube voltage and an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm in CT enterography: Effects on image quality and radiation dose.

Authors:  Cui Feng; Di Zhu; Xianlun Zou; Anqin Li; Xuemei Hu; Zhen Li; Daoyu Hu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 1.889

5.  Correlation of 18F-FDG PET/MRE Metrics with Inflammatory Biomarkers in Patients with Crohn's Disease: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Liran Domachevsky; Haim Leibovitzh; Irit Avni-Biron; Lev Lichtenstein; Natalia Goldberg; Meital Nidam; David Groshar; Hanna Bernstine; Ofer Ben-Bassat
Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 3.161

6.  Guidelines for the investigation of chronic diarrhoea in adults: British Society of Gastroenterology, 3rd edition.

Authors:  Ramesh P Arasaradnam; Steven Brown; Alastair Forbes; Mark R Fox; Pali Hungin; Lawrence Kelman; Giles Major; Michelle O'Connor; Dave S Sanders; Rakesh Sinha; Stephen Charles Smith; Paul Thomas; Julian R F Walters
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 7.  New Directions in Imaging Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.

Authors:  Julie Refardt; Johannes Hofland; Damian Wild; Emanuel Christ
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2021-11-04       Impact factor: 5.075

8.  Efficiency of dual-energy computed tomography enterography in the diagnosis of Crohn's disease.

Authors:  Jinghao Chen; Jie Zhou; Jushun Yang; Ruochen Cong; Jinjie Sun; Jing Xiao; Jianhua Shi; Bosheng He
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 1.930

9.  Routine contrast-enhanced CT is insufficient for TNM-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  G Litjens; C J H M van Laarhoven; M Prokop; E J M van Geenen; J J Hermans
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2022-07-21

10.  Utility of noncontrast MRI in the detection and risk grading of gastrointestinal stromal tumor: a comparison with contrast-enhanced CT.

Authors:  Ziling Zhou; Jingyu Lu; John N Morelli; Daoyu Hu; Zhen Li; Peng Xiao; Xuemei Hu; Yaqi Shen
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2021-06
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.