Intest Res.  2015 Jan;13(1):27-38. 10.5217/ir.2015.13.1.27.

Computed Tomography Enterography and Magnetic Resonance Enterography in the Diagnosis of Crohn's Disease

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea. shkim7071@gmail.com

Abstract

Imaging of the small bowel is complicated by its length and its overlapping loops. Recently, however, the development of crosssectional imaging techniques, such as computed tomography enterography (CTE) and magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) has shifted fundamental paradigms in the diagnosis and management of patients with suspected or known Crohn's disease (CD). CTE and MRE are noninvasive imaging tests that involve the use of intraluminal oral and intravenous contrast agents to evaluate the small bowel. Here, we review recent advances in each cross-sectional imaging modality, their advantages and disadvantages, and their diagnostic performances in the evaluation of small bowel lesions in CD.

Keyword

Tomography, spiral computed; Magnetic resonance imaging; Inflammatory bowel diseases; Crohn disease

MeSH Terms

Contrast Media
Crohn Disease*
Diagnosis*
Humans
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Tomography, Spiral Computed
Contrast Media

Figure

  • Fig. 1 Coronal CT enterography images using different types of neutral enteric contrast agents. CT enterography using polyethylene glycol (middle) and sorbitol (right) distends the small bowel effectively, while CT enterography using water (left) distends the small-bowel loops suboptimally.

  • Fig. 2 An axial CT enterography image using diluted gastrografin as a positive enteric contrast agent. Marked bowel wall thickenings (arrows) are present at the distal ileum. However, mucosal enhancement is completely obscured by the high-attenuation intraluminal positive contrast agent (*).

  • Fig. 3 CT enteroclysis. A coronal CT enteroclysis image with the marked and uniform distension of entire small-bowel loops, including the jejunum (*) and the ileum (•). Note the nasojejunal catheter inserted in the stomach (arrow) and the duodenum (arrowhead).

  • Fig. 4 Three-dimensional reconstruction CT images of the small bowel. (A) Sagittal multiplanar reconstruction CT images demonstrate wall thickening with luminal narrowing (arrows) with fibrofatty proliferation (*) in the descending colon of a patient with CD. (B) Arterial phase, maximum intensity projection images in different patients depict the marked engorgement of the mesenteric vessels (comb sign) (*) supplying the involved bowel segment. (C) A transparent volume-rendering CT enteroclysis image using air as a negative contrast agent clearly demonstrates longitudinal ulceration and shortening (arrows) on the mesenteric border of the ileum, and pseudosacculation (arrowheads) on the anti-mesenteric border. (D) A virtual enteroscopy image from the same patient also shows longitudinal ulceration and a fold deformity (arrows) in the ileum.

  • Fig. 5 Low-dose CT enterography images obtained using 100 kVp and 150 mAs in a 17-year-old boy with suspected CD. (A) An enteric phase CT image reconstructed using the conventional filtered back projection algorithm, had suboptimal image quality at the pelvic cavity because of severe noise. (B) However, the CT image reconstructed using an iterative reconstruction algorithm demonstrates a dramatic reduction in image noise, and shows multifocal enhancing wall thickening (arrows) in the distal ileum. The patient was diagnosed with CD on the basis of colonoscopic biopsy.

  • Fig. 6 A 15-year-old boy with CD and elevated inflammatory markers. (A-C) Magnetic resonance enterography images using (A) true fast imaging with steady-state precession (TrueFISP) (B) half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo (HASTE), and (C) postcontrast T1-weighted 3-dimensional spoiled gradient recalled (SPGR) fat-saturated sequences show marked and asymmetric ileal wall thickening (arrows). Note the marked engorgement of the adjacent mesenteric vessels (comb sign) (*) on the TrueFISP sequence (A) and marked enhancement on the postcontrast T1-weighted sequence (C), indicating active inflammation.

  • Fig. 7 A 15-year-old boy with CD. (A) Axial half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo (HASTE) and (B) postcontrast T1-weighted magnetic resonance enterography images show marked distal ileal circumferential wall thickening with strong transmural hyperenhancement (arrowheads), consistent with active inflammation. (C) Axial diffusion-weighted image demonstrates the high signal intensity (arrowheads) associated with the involved ileum, suggesting the restricted diffusion of water within the distal ileum because of active inflammation.

  • Fig. 8 CT findings of active inflammation in CD. (A) An axial CT image shows bowel wall thickening (arrows) with bilaminar mural stratification and mucosal hyperenhancement. (B) A coronal CT image of a different patient demonstrates trilaminar mural stratification (arrows) with mucosal and serosal hyperenhancement. Note the dilated vasa recta (*) or comb sign in the mesentery, A B indicating active disease.

  • Fig. 9 Chronic CD with submucosal fat deposits (arrows) in several small bowel loops.

  • Fig. 10 Reversible and irreversible strictures in CD. (A) A reversible stricture. The axial CT image demonstrates the narrowing of the bowel lumen caused by bowel wall edema with mural hyperenhancement and mural stratification (arrows), indicating that the stricture is not yet fibrotic. (B) An irreversible stricture. The axial CT image shows an abrupt luminal narrowing of the jejunum (arrows) with homogeneous and weak enhancement. The patient underwent jejunal segmental resection, and final histopathology confirmed chronic fibrotic strictures associated with CD (not shown).

  • Fig. 11 A 38-year-old man with CD. The axial CT image clearly depicts an enteroenteric fistula (arrow) in the right lower quadrant area.

  • Fig. 12 Fibrofatty proliferation in a 26-year-old man with active CD. The axial CT image shows a marked proliferation of fat (*) at the medial aspect of the inflamed ascending colon (A). Note the paucity of fat around the normal descending colon (D).

  • Fig. 13 An anal fistula and perianal abscess in a 27-year-old man with CD. (A) An axial CT image shows a large perianal abscess (*) just next to the anus (a). However, the anal fistula itself is not apparent on the CT image. (B) In contrast, serial T2-weighted magnetic resonance images clearly depict an anal fistula itself (arrows), which connects the anal lumen (a) and perianal abscess (*).


Cited by  2 articles

Crohn’s disease at radiological imaging: focus on techniques and intestinal tract
Giuseppe Cicero, Silvio Mazziotti
Intest Res. 2021;19(4):365-378.    doi: 10.5217/ir.2020.00097.

Magnetic resonance enterography for the evaluation of the deep small intestine in Crohn's disease
Kazuo Ohtsuka, Kento Takenaka, Yoshio Kitazume, Toshimitsu Fujii, Katsuyoshi Matsuoka, Maiko Kimura, Takashi Nagaishi, Mamoru Watanabe
Intest Res. 2016;14(2):120-126.    doi: 10.5217/ir.2016.14.2.120.


Reference

1. Raptopoulos V, Schwartz RK, McNicholas MM, Movson J, Pearlman J, Joffe N. Multiplanar helical CT enterography in patients with Crohn's disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997; 169:1545–1550. PMID: 9393162.
Article
2. Paulsen SR, Huprich JE, Fletcher JG, et al. CT enterography as a diagnostic tool in evaluating small bowel disorders: review of clinical experience with over 700 cases. Radiographics. 2006; 26:641–657. PMID: 16702444.
Article
3. Maglinte DD, Sandrasegaran K, Lappas JC. CT enteroclysis: techniques and applications. Radiol Clin North Am. 2007; 45:289–301. PMID: 17502218.
4. Wold PB, Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Sandborn WJ. Assessment of small bowel Crohn disease: noninvasive peroral CT enterography compared with other imaging methods and endoscopy--feasibility study. Radiology. 2003; 229:275–281. PMID: 12944602.
Article
5. Negaard A, Sandvik L, Berstad AE, et al. MRI of the small bowel with oral contrast or nasojejunal intubation in Crohn's disease: randomized comparison of patient acceptance. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2008; 43:44–51. PMID: 18158695.
Article
6. Hara AK, Leighton JA, Heigh RI, et al. Crohn disease of the small bowel: preliminary comparison among CT enterography, capsule endoscopy, small-bowel follow-through, and ileoscopy. Radiology. 2006; 238:128–134. PMID: 16373764.
Article
7. Huprich JE, Fletcher JG, Alexander JA, Fidler JL, Burton SS, Mc-Cullough CH. Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: evaluation with 64-section multiphase CT enterography--initial experience. Radiology. 2008; 246:562–571. PMID: 18227546.
Article
8. Hakim FA, Alexander JA, Huprich JE, Grover M, Enders FT. CT-enterography may identify small bowel tumors not detected by capsule endoscopy: eight years experience at Mayo Clinic Rochester. Dig Dis Sci. 2011; 56:2914–2919. PMID: 21735085.
9. Hammer MR, Podberesky DJ, Dillman JR. Multidetector computed tomographic and magnetic resonance enterography in children: state of the art. Radiol Clin North Am. 2013; 51:615–636. PMID: 23830789.
Article
10. Lee SS, Kim AY, Yang SK, et al. Crohn disease of the small bowel: comparison of CT enterography, MR enterography, and small-bowel follow-through as diagnostic techniques. Radiology. 2009; 251:751–761. PMID: 19276325.
Article
11. Hara AK, Swartz PG. CT enterography of Crohn's disease. Abdom Imaging. 2009; 34:289–295. PMID: 18649092.
Article
12. Bodily KD, Fletcher JG, Solem CA, et al. Crohn Disease: mural attenuation and thickness at contrast-enhanced CT Enterography--correlation with endoscopic and histologic findings of inflammation. Radiology. 2006; 238:505–516. PMID: 16436815.
Article
13. Vogel J, da Luz Moreira A, Baker M, et al. CT enterography for Crohn disease: accurate preoperative diagnostic imaging. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007; 50:1761–1769. PMID: 17701255.
14. Siddiki HA, Fidler JL, Fletcher JG, et al. Prospective comparison of state-of-the-art MR enterography and CT enterography in small-bowel Crohn's disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009; 193:113–121. PMID: 19542402.
Article
15. Fletcher JG. CT enterography technique: theme and variations. Abdom Imaging. 2009; 34:283–288. PMID: 18551337.
Article
16. Minordi LM, Vecchioli A, Mirk P, Bonomo L. CT enterography with polyethylene glycol solution vs CT enteroclysis in small bowel disease. Br J Radiol. 2011; 84:112–119. PMID: 20959377.
Article
17. Berther R, Patak MA, Eckhardt B, Erturk SM, Zollikofer CL. Comparison of neutral oral contrast versus positive oral contrast medium in abdominal multidetector CT. Eur Radiol. 2008; 18:1902–1909. PMID: 18414870.
Article
18. Megibow AJ, Babb JS, Hecht EM, et al. Evaluation of bowel distention and bowel wall appearance by using neutral oral contrast agent for multi-detector row CT. Radiology. 2006; 238:87–95. PMID: 16293806.
19. Maglinte DD, Sandrasegaran K, Lappas JC, Chiorean M. CT Enteroclysis. Radiology. 2007; 245:661–671. PMID: 18024448.
Article
20. Vandenbroucke F, Mortele KJ, Tatli S, et al. Noninvasive multidetector computed tomography enterography in patients with small-bowel Crohn's disease: is a 40-second delay better than 70 seconds? Acta Radiol. 2007; 48:1052–1060. PMID: 17963078.
Article
21. Kambadakone AR, Prakash P, Hahn PF, Sahani DV. Low-dose CT examinations in Crohn's disease: impact on image quality, diagnostic performance, and radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010; 195:78–88. PMID: 20566800.
Article
22. Hara AK, Paden RG, Silva AC, Kujak JL, Lawder HJ, Pavlicek W. Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009; 193:764–771. PMID: 19696291.
Article
23. Ghetti C, Ortenzia O, Serreli G. CT iterative reconstruction in image space: a phantom study. Phys Med. 2012; 28:161–165. PMID: 21497530.
24. Lee SJ, Park SH, Kim AY, et al. A prospective comparison of standard-dose CT enterography and 50% reduced-dose CT enterography with and without noise reduction for evaluating Crohn disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 197:50–57. PMID: 21701010.
Article
25. Craig O, O'Neill S, O'Neill F, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography using lower doses of radiation for patients with Crohn's disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012; 10:886–892. PMID: 22469992.
Article
26. Kaza RK, Platt JF, Al-Hawary MM, Wasnik A, Liu PS, Pandya A. CT enterography at 80 kVp with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction versus at 120 kVp with standard reconstruction: image quality, diagnostic adequacy, and dose reduction. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012; 198:1084–1092. PMID: 22528897.
Article
27. Gee MS, Harisinghani MG. MRI in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011; 33:527–534. PMID: 21512607.
Article
28. Ippolito D, Invernizzi F, Galimberti S, Panelli MR, Sironi S. MR enterography with polyethylene glycol as oral contrast medium in the follow-up of patients with Crohn disease: comparison with CT enterography. Abdom Imaging. 2010; 35:563–570. PMID: 19582502.
29. Jensen MD, Kjeldsen J, Rafaelsen SR, Nathan T. Diagnostic accuracies of MR enterography and CT enterography in symptomatic Crohn's disease. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2011; 46:1449–1457. PMID: 21905974.
Article
30. Gee MS, Nimkin K, Hsu M, et al. Prospective evaluation of MR enterography as the primary imaging modality for pediatric Crohn disease assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 197:224–231. PMID: 21701034.
Article
31. Expert Panel on Gastrointestinal Imaging. American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria®: Crohn disease. 2011. 1–17. Available from: http://www.acr.org/~/media/ACR/Documents/AppCriteria/Diagnostic/CrohnDisease.pdf.
32. Fidler JL, Guimaraes L, Einstein DM. MR imaging of the small bowel. Radiographics. 2009; 29:1811–1825. PMID: 19959523.
Article
33. Oto A, Zhu F, Kulkarni K, Karczmar GS, Turner JR, Rubin D. Evaluation of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for detection of bowel inflammation in patients with Crohn's disease. Acad Radiol. 2009; 16:597–603. PMID: 19282206.
Article
34. Oto A, Kayhan A, Williams JT, et al. Active Crohn's disease in the small bowel: evaluation by diffusion weighted imaging and quantitative dynamic contrast enhanced MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011; 33:615–624. PMID: 21563245.
35. Yacoub JH, Oto A. New magnetic resonance imaging modalities for Crohn disease. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2014; 22:35–50. PMID: 24238131.
Article
36. Ye BD, Yang SK, Shin SJ, et al. Guidelines for the management of Crohn's disease. Intest Res. 2012; 10:26–66.
Article
37. Schwartz DA, Loftus EV Jr, Tremaine WJ, et al. The natural history of fistulizing Crohn's disease in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Gastroenterology. 2002; 122:875–880. PMID: 11910338.
Article
38. Maconi G, Sampietro GM, Parente F, et al. Contrast radiology, computed tomography and ultrasonography in detecting internal fistulas and intra-abdominal abscesses in Crohn's disease: a prospective comparative study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003; 98:1545–1555. PMID: 12873576.
Article
39. Prassopoulos P, Papanikolaou N, Grammatikakis J, Rousomoustakaki M, Maris T, Gourtsoyiannis N. MR enteroclysis imaging of Crohn disease. Radiographics. 2001; 21(Special Issue):S161–S172. PMID: 11598255.
40. Maglinte DD, Gourtsoyiannis N, Rex D, Howard TJ, Kelvin FM. Classification of small bowel Crohn's subtypes based on multimodality imaging. Radiol Clin North Am. 2003; 41:285–303. PMID: 12659339.
Article
41. Koh DM, Miao Y, Chinn RJ, et al. MR imaging evaluation of the activity of Crohn's disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001; 177:1325–1332. PMID: 11717076.
Article
42. Solem CA, Loftus EV Jr, Fletcher JG, et al. Small-bowel imaging in Crohn's disease: a prospective, blinded, 4-way comparison trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008; 68:255–266. PMID: 18513722.
Article
43. Masselli G, Casciani E, Polettini E, Gualdi G. Comparison of MR enteroclysis with MR enterography and conventional enteroclysis in patients with Crohn's disease. Eur Radiol. 2008; 18:438–447. PMID: 17899102.
Article
44. Gölder SK, Schreyer AG, Endlicher E, et al. Comparison of capsule endoscopy and magnetic resonance (MR) enteroclysis in suspected small bowel disease. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2006; 21:97–104. PMID: 15846497.
45. Fiorino G, Bonifacio C, Peyrin-Biroulet L, et al. Prospective comparison of computed tomography enterography and magnetic resonance enterography for assessment of disease activity and complications in ileocolonic Crohn's disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2011; 17:1073–1080. PMID: 21484958.
Article
46. Jensen MD, Ormstrup T, Vagn-Hansen C, Ostergaard L, Rafaelsen SR. Interobserver and intermodality agreement for detection of small bowel Crohn's disease with MR enterography and CT enterography. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2011; 17:1081–1088. PMID: 21484959.
Article
47. Towbin AJ, Sullivan J, Denson LA, Wallihan DB, Podberesky DJ. CT and MR enterography in children and adolescents with inflammatory bowel disease. Radiographics. 2013; 33:1843–1860. PMID: 24224581.
Article
48. Koelbel G, Schmiedl U, Majer MC, et al. Diagnosis of fistulae and sinus tracts in patients with Crohn disease: value of MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989; 152:999–1003. PMID: 2705359.
Article
49. Essary B, Kim J, Anupindi S, Katz JA, Nimkin K. Pelvic MRI in children with Crohn disease and suspected perianal involvement. Pediatr Radiol. 2007; 37:201–208. PMID: 17180366.
Full Text Links
  • IR
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr