Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2019
Capsule Endoscopy Complements Magnetic Resonance Enterography and Endoscopy in Evaluating Small Bowel Crohn's Disease.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Prichard David O, Hamilton Zachary, Savage Thomas, Smyth Matthew, Penner Carlie, Lakhani Alam, Carroll Matthew W, Al Sarkhy Ahmed, Lemberg Daniel A, Enns Robert, Jamieson Douglas, Jacobson Kevan
Аннотация
AIMS: Wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) and magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) are increasingly utilized to evaluate the small bowel (SB) in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary aims were to compare the ability of WCE and MRE to detect SB inflammation in children with newly diagnosed CD, and in the terminal ileum (TI) to compare them to ileo-colonoscopy. Secondary aims were to compare diagnostic accuracy of WCE and MRE and changes in Paris classification after each study.
METHODS: Patients (10 to 17 years of age) requiring ileo-colonoscopy for suspected CD were invited to participate. Only patients with endoscopic/histologic evidence of CD underwent MRE and WCE. SB inflammation and extent were documented and comparative analyses performed.
RESULTS: Of 38 initially recruited subjects, 20 completed the study. WCE and MRE were similarly sensitive in identifying active TI inflammation (16 [80%] versus 12 [60%]) and any SB inflammation (17 [85%] versus 16 [80%]). However, WCE detected more extensive SB disease than MRE with active inflammation throughout the SB in 15 [75%] versus 1 [5%] patient (P < 0.001). Moreover, WCE was more likely to detect proximal SB disease (jejunum and ileum) compared to MRE (85% versus 50%, P = 0.04). Overall, the Paris classification changed in 65% and 85% of patients following MRE and WCE, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: WCE is as sensitive as MRE for identifying active TI inflammation, but appears more sensitive in identifying more proximal SB inflammation. In the absence of concern regarding stricturing or extra-luminal disease WCE can be considered for the evaluation of suspected SB CD.
METHODS: Patients (10 to 17 years of age) requiring ileo-colonoscopy for suspected CD were invited to participate. Only patients with endoscopic/histologic evidence of CD underwent MRE and WCE. SB inflammation and extent were documented and comparative analyses performed.
RESULTS: Of 38 initially recruited subjects, 20 completed the study. WCE and MRE were similarly sensitive in identifying active TI inflammation (16 [80%] versus 12 [60%]) and any SB inflammation (17 [85%] versus 16 [80%]). However, WCE detected more extensive SB disease than MRE with active inflammation throughout the SB in 15 [75%] versus 1 [5%] patient (P < 0.001). Moreover, WCE was more likely to detect proximal SB disease (jejunum and ileum) compared to MRE (85% versus 50%, P = 0.04). Overall, the Paris classification changed in 65% and 85% of patients following MRE and WCE, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: WCE is as sensitive as MRE for identifying active TI inflammation, but appears more sensitive in identifying more proximal SB inflammation. In the absence of concern regarding stricturing or extra-luminal disease WCE can be considered for the evaluation of suspected SB CD.