Literature DB >> 27192460

Time-Intensity Curves Obtained after Microbubble Injection Can Be Used to Differentiate Responders from Nonresponders among Patients with Clinically Active Crohn Disease after 6 Weeks of Pharmacologic Treatment.

Emilio Quaia1, Michele Sozzi1, Roberta Angileri1, Antonio Giulio Gennari1, Maria Assunta Cova1.   

Abstract

Purpose To assess whether contrast material-enhanced ultrasonography (US) can be used to differentiate responders from nonresponders among patients with clinically active Crohn disease after 6 weeks of pharmacologic treatment. Materials and Methods This prospective study was approved by our ethics committee, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Fifty consecutive patients (26 men and 24 women; mean age, 34.76 years ± 9) with a proved diagnosis of active Crohn disease who were scheduled to begin therapy with biologics (infliximab or adalimumab) were included, with enrollment from June 1, 2013, to June 1, 2015. In each patient, the terminal ileal loop was imaged with contrast-enhanced US before the beginning and at the end of week 6 of pharmacologic treatment. Time-intensity curves obtained in responders (those with a decrease in the Crohn disease endoscopic index of severity score of 25-44 before treatment to 10-15 after treatment, an inflammatory score <7, and/or a decrease ≥70 in the Crohn disease activity index score compared with baseline) and nonresponders were compared with Mann-Whitney test. Results Responders (n = 31) and nonresponders (n = 19) differed (P < .05) in the percent change of peak enhancement (-40.78 ± 62.85 vs 53.21 ± 72.5; P = .0001), wash-in (-34.8 ± 67.72 vs 89.44 ± 145.32; P = .001) and washout (-5.64 ± 130.71 vs 166.83 ± 204.44; P = .002) rate, wash-in perfusion index (-42.29 ± 59.21 vs 50.96 ± 71.13; P = .001), area under the time-intensity curve (AUC; -46.17 ± 48.42 vs 41.78 ± 87.64; P = .001), AUC during wash-in (-43.93 ± 54.29 vs 39.79 ± 70.85; P = .001), and AUC during washout (-49.36 ± 47.42 vs 42.65 ± 97.09; P = .001). Responders and nonresponders did not differ in the percent change of rise time (5.09 ± 49.13 vs 6.24 ± 48.06; P = .93) and time to peak enhancement (8.82 ± 54.5 vs 10.21 ± 43.25; P = .3). Conclusion Analysis of time-intensity curves obtained after injection of microbubble contrast material 6 weeks after beginning pharmacologic treatment can be used to differentiate responders from nonresponders among patients with clinically active Crohn disease. © RSNA, 2016.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27192460     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016152461

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


  10 in total

1.  Quantitative contrast-enhanced US helps differentiating neoplastic vs non-neoplastic gallbladder polyps.

Authors:  Jae Seok Bae; Se Hyung Kim; Hyo-Jin Kang; Haeryoung Kim; Ji Kon Ryu; Jin-Young Jang; Sang Hyub Lee; Woo Hyun Paik; Wooil Kwon; Jae Young Lee; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  SICUS and CEUS imaging in Crohn's disease: an update.

Authors:  Giammarco Mocci; Vincenzo Migaleddu; Francesco Cabras; Danilo Sirigu; Domenico Scanu; Giuseppe Virgilio; Manuela Marzo
Journal:  J Ultrasound       Date:  2017-01-02

3.  Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Enterography and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography in Crohn's Disease: An Observational Comparison Study.

Authors:  Rune Wilkens; David A Peters; Agnete H Nielsen; Valeriya P Hovgaard; Henning Glerup; Klaus Krogh
Journal:  Ultrasound Int Open       Date:  2017-02

Review 4.  Role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in evaluation of the bowel.

Authors:  Alexandra Medellin; Christina Merrill; Stephanie R Wilson
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2018-04

Review 5.  Intestinal ultrasound and management of small bowel Crohn's disease.

Authors:  Torsten Kucharzik; Christian Maaser
Journal:  Therap Adv Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 4.409

6.  Magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) and ultrasonography (US) in the study of the small bowel in Crohn's disease: state of the art and review of the literature.

Authors:  Rosa Manetta; Ilaria Capretti; Noemi Belleggia; Claudia Marsecano; Angelo Viscido; Federico Bruno; Francesco Arrigoni; Liheng Ma; Giuseppe Guglielmi; Alessandra Splendiani; Ernesto Di Cesare; Carlo Masciocchi; Antonio Barile
Journal:  Acta Biomed       Date:  2019-04-24

7.  Therapeutic response monitoring after targeted therapy in an orthotopic rat model of hepatocellular carcinoma using contrast-enhanced ultrasound: Focusing on inter-scanner, and inter-operator reproducibility.

Authors:  Hwaseong Ryu; Jung Hoon Kim; Seunghyun Lee; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-23       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Ultrasound-Based Molecular Imaging of Tumors with PTPmu Biomarker-Targeted Nanobubble Contrast Agents.

Authors:  Mette L Johansen; Reshani Perera; Eric Abenojar; Xinning Wang; Jason Vincent; Agata A Exner; Susann M Brady-Kalnay
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-02-17       Impact factor: 5.923

9.  US Molecular Imaging of Acute Ileitis: Anti-Inflammatory Treatment Response Monitored with Targeted Microbubbles in a Preclinical Model.

Authors:  Huaijun Wang; Jean-Marc Hyvelin; Stephen A Felt; Ismayil Guracar; Jose G Vilches-Moure; Samir Cherkaoui; Thierry Bettinger; Lu Tian; Amelie M Lutz; Jürgen K Willmann
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 29.146

10.  The effect of sedation with a combination of butorphanol and midazolam on quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasonography of duodenum in healthy dogs.

Authors:  Khoirun Nisa; Sue Yee Lim; Tatsuyuki Osuga; Nozomu Yokoyama; Masahiro Tamura; Noriyuki Nagata; Kazuyoshi Sasaoka; Angkhana Dermlim; Rommaneeya Leela-Arporn; Tomoya Morita; Noboru Sasaki; Keitaro Morishita; Kensuke Nakamura; Hiroshi Ohta; Mitsuyoshi Takiguchi
Journal:  J Vet Med Sci       Date:  2018-02-02       Impact factor: 1.267

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.