These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Bowel Wall Visualization Using MR Enterography in Relationship to Bowel Lumen Contents and Patient Demographics.
    Author: Zhang TT, Chang WC, Wang ZJ, Sun DC, Ohliger MA, Yeh BM.
    Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging; 2021 Sep; 54(3):728-736. PubMed ID: 33665942.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: MR enterography (MRE) is generally performed without bowel preparation, but the frequency and extent by which bowel contents affect bowel wall visualization are poorly described in the literature. PURPOSE: To evaluate MRE bowel wall visualization quality relative to bowel lumen contents and patient demographics. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective, single-center. POPULATION: One hundred and four consecutive patients (mean age 29 years, range 5-76 years) without prior bowel resection who had undergone MRE. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3 T (N = 87) or 1.5 T (N = 17)/T2-weighted single-shot spin echo (T2WI) and fat-saturated T1-weighted gradient echo (T1WI) without and with gadolinium. ASSESSMENT: For the proximal and distal jejunum and ileum and colon, three readers independently categorized bowel lumen signal (water = bright T2 dark T1, T1-bright, or air = dark T2 and T1 signal) and scored distension (0 = poor, 1 = moderate, 2 = well) and wall enhancement (0 = unclear, 1 = perceptible, 2 = clear) based upon gadolinium enhanced T1WI for the 104 MRE exams). The bowel visualization score was the sum of the wall enhancement and distension scores and was considered adequate if ≥3. STATISTICAL TESTS: Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: The bowel lumen content was water signal in 93% (97/104 scans), 92% (95/104), 98% (102/104), and 93% (92/104) of the proximal and distal jejunum and proximal and distal ileum, respectively, but only in 12.5% (13/104) of the colon. There was adequate bowel visualization of 53.8%, 77.8%, 84.6%, 90.4% of the proximal and distal jejunum and proximal and distal ileum, respectively, but only 19.2% of the colon. In children (age < 18 years), the visualization score of the ileum was lower when the adjacent colon contained air (2.4 ± 0.97) compared to water (3.75 ± 0.29, P < 0.05) or T1-bright material (3.21 ± 0.82, P < 0.05). DATA CONCLUSION: Without bowel preparation, colon wall visualization was often unsatisfactory at MRE, and air-filled colon also degraded small bowel visualization, particularly in children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]