Comparison of the Diagnostic Value of Transabdominal Intestinal Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Enterography for Intestinal Stenosis in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.
10.3881/j.issn.1000-503X.16850
- Author:
Kun WANG
1
;
Yan-Jia GOU
1
;
Li-Xue XU
2
;
Wei-Ming KANG
3
;
Dong LIU
1
Author Information
1. Department of Ultrasound,Beijing Friendship Hospital,Capital Medical University,Beijing 100050,China.
2. Department of Radiology,Beijing Friendship Hospital,Capital Medical University,Beijing 100050,China.
3. Department of General Surgery,PUMC Hospital,CAMS and PUMC,Beijing 100730,China.
- Publication Type:Comparative Study
- Keywords:
diagnostic consistency;
inflammatory bowel disease;
intestinal stenosis;
magnetic resonance enterography;
transabdominal intestinal ultrasound
- MeSH:
Humans;
Retrospective Studies;
Constriction, Pathologic/diagnostic imaging*;
Ultrasonography/methods*;
Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods*;
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/diagnostic imaging*;
Male;
Female;
Adult;
Middle Aged;
Intestines/diagnostic imaging*;
Sensitivity and Specificity
- From:
Acta Academiae Medicinae Sinicae
2025;47(5):725-732
- CountryChina
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the diagnostic value of transabdominal intestinal ultrasound (IUS) and magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) for intestinal stenosis in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the imaging features of 51 IBD patients who underwent both IUS and MRE at Beijing Friendship Hospital,Capital Medical University,between January 2021 and February 2025.With endoscopy as the gold standard,the diagnostic performance of the two methods was compared. Results The sensitivity (84.2% vs. 52.6%,P=0.008) and accuracy (66.7% vs. 45.1%,P=0.035) of IUS for stenosis were higher than those of MRE.In the localization of stenosis,IUS demonstrated higher sensitivity than MRE for detecting stenosis in the terminal ileum (78.6% vs. 35.7%,P=0.070) and colorectum (86.7% vs. 53.3%,P=0.060).Furthermore,IUS showed higher diagnostic accuracy than MRE for terminal ileum stenosis (70.6% vs. 29.4%,P=0.039).The intestinal wall thickness[(8.2±2.7) mm vs. (10.3±3.8) mm;t=3.20,P=0.002)] and stenosis inner diameter[(3.0±1.6) mm vs. (4.3±1.8) mm;t=2.15,P=0.035] measured by IUS were lower than those measured by MRE,with a moderate level of consistency (ICC:0.19-0.53).In addition,IUS demonstrated a higher detection rate for mesenteric fat hypertrophy (70.6% vs. 27.5%,Kappa=0.27,P=0.005),whereas MRE was more sensitive in detecting lymphadenopathy (90.2% vs. 56.9%,Kappa=0.16,P=0.080). Conclusions IUS is superior to MRE in the diagnosis and localization sensitivity for intestinal stenosis in IBD.However,the two methods showcase poor consistency in detecting and quantitating some inflammatory signs.IUS can be used as a first-line screening method for diagnosing intestinal stenosis in IBD patients,while its clinical application should be combined with specific needs to optimize diagnosis.
