Abstract
Recent advances in CT and MR technology, particularly the advent of multidetector CT (MDCT), the advent of rapidly changing gradients in industry standard MRI scanners, enabling ultrafast sequences, have led to an expansion in the role of cross sectional imaging in the investigation of small bowel disorders. We conducted an evidence-based review of MR enteroclysis (MRE) and how it performs in comparison to CT enteroclysis (CTE) and the gold standard of conventional enteroclysis (CE) for diagnosis of small bowel Crohn’s disease and small bowel neoplasia. We used the standard 5 step evidence-based medicine method of ask, search, appraise, apply and evaluate. We found 3 relevant level 1B studies, and one level 3B study. No studies evaluating MRE in small bowel neoplasia were found. MRE does not perform as well as CE in evaluation of fine mucosal detail, but the additional extraluminal detail, and absence of ionising radiation enhances its overall performance. It was not possible to establish the relative diagnostic performances of MRE and CTE from existing literature. CTE does involve patient irradiation. For patients in whom jejunal intubation and enteroclysis is considered to evaluate the small bowel, MRE should be considered the first-line investigation, local resources and expertise permitting.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Staunton M (2007) Evidence-based radiology: steps 1 and 2—asking answerable questions and searching for evidence. Radiology 242(1):23–31
Haynes RB (2001) Of studies, summaries, synopses, and systems: the “4S” evolution of services for finding current best evidence. Evid Based Ment Health 4(2):37–37
Entrez PubMed. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?DB=pubmed. Date Accessed May 5th 2007
Levels of evidence Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. http://www.cebm.net/levels_of_evidence.asp. Date Accessed May 5th 2007
Dodd JD (2007) Evidence-based practice in radiology: steps 3 and 4–appraise and apply diagnostic radiology literature. Radiology 242(2):342–354
Dodd JD, MacEneaney PM, Malone DE (2004) Evidence-based radiology: how to quickly assess the validity and strength of publications in the diagnostic radiology literature. Eur Radiol 14(5):915–922
Gourtsoyiannis NC, Grammatikakis J, Papamastorakis G et al (2006) Imaging of small intestinal Crohn’s disease: comparison between MR enteroclysis and conventional enteroclysis. Eur Radiol 16(9):1915–1925
Masselli G, Brizi MG, Menchini L et al (2005) Magnetic Resonance Enteroclysis imaging of Crohn’s. Radiol Med 110(3):221–233
Darbari A, Sena L, Argani P et al (2004) Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: a useful radiological tool in diagnosing pediatric IBD. Inflamm Bowel Dis 10(2):67–72
Schmidt S, Lepori D, Meuwly JY et al (2003) Prospective comparison of MR enteroclysis with multidetector spiral-CT enteroclysis: interobserver agreement and sensitivity by means of “sign-by-sign” correlation. Eur Radiol 13(6):1303–1311
Cancer in Ireland 1994–2001 Incidence, mortality and treatment, National Cancer Registry of Ireland 2005
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the extensive advice and assistance of Dr Dermot Malone, in the writing of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ryan, E.R., Heaslip, I.S.E. Magnetic resonance enteroclysis compared with conventional enteroclysis and computed tomography enteroclysis: a critically appraised topic. Abdom Imaging 33, 34–37 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-007-9308-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-007-9308-z