Skip to main content

Small-Bowel Imaging: Pitfalls in Computed Tomography Enterography/Enteroclysis

  • Chapter
  • 1016 Accesses

Abstract

Computed tomography enterography (CTEG) is a focused CT scan examination of the small intestine that combines the advantages of isotropic, thin-section multiplanar CT; the large volumes of neutral-density oral contrast; and rapid administration of intravenous contrast. Oral contrast agents such as 0.1% barium, polyethylene glycol (PEG) and methylcellulose contain additives that inhibit fluid reabsorption and allow maximal bowel distention. Intravenous contrast is injected at the “enteric phase” (about 45 s) to provide maximum wall enhancement against the neutral-density lumen (0–30 HU) [1]. Pharmacological manipulation to interrupt small-bowel spasm and encourage gastric emptying is commonly used, including glucagon and metoclopramide, respectively. The indications for CTEG include Crohn’s disease and other enteritides, obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), detection of intestinal masses, and sprue. A prospective blinded comparison of CTEG with wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) using clinical consensus as the gold-standard found similar sensitivities (82 vs. 83%) for active small-bowel Crohn’s disease, but CTEG was far more specific than WCE (89 vs. 53%).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Colombel JF, Solem CA, Sandborn WJ et al (2006) Quantitative measurement and visual assessment of ileal Crohn’s disease activity by computed tomography enterography: correlation with endoscopic severity and C reactive protein. Gut 55:1561–1567

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Paulsen SR, Huprich JE, Hara AK (2007) CT enterography: Noninvasive evaluation of Crohn’s Disease and obscure gastrointestinal bleed. Radiol Clin N Am 45:303–315

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Huprich JE, Fletcher JG (2009) CT enterography: Principles, technique and utility in Crohn’s disease. Eur J Radiol 69:393–397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dave-Verma H, Moore S, Singh A et al (2008) Computed tomographic enterography and enteroclysis: pearls and pitfalls. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 37:279–287

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wold PB, Fletcher JG, Johnson CD et al (2003) Assessment of small bowel Crohn disease: Noninvasive peroral CT enterography compared with other imaging methods and endoscopyfeasibility study. Radiology 229:275–281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Vogel J, Moreira A, Baker M (2007) CT enterography for Crohn’s disease: Accurate preoperative diagnostic imaging. Dis Colon Rectum 50:1761–1769

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Solem CA, Loftus Jr EV, Fletcher JG et al (2008) Small-bowel imaging in Crohn’s disease: a prospective, blinded, 4-way comparison trial. Gastrointest Endosc 68:255–266

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hara AK, Alam S, Heigh RI et al (2008) Using CT enterography to monitor Crohn’s disease activity: a preliminary study. AJR 190:1512–1516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Higgins PDR, Caoli E, Zimmerman M et al (2007) Computed tomographic enterography adds information to clinical management in small bowel Crohn’s disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 13:262–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bruining DH, Siddicki H, Fletcher JG (2008) Clinical benefit of CT enterography in suspected or established Crohn’s disease: impact on patient management and physician level of confidence. Gastroenterology S1211

    Google Scholar 

  11. Singh V, Alexander JA (2008) The evaluation and management of obscure and occult gastrointestinal bleeding. Abdom Imaging 34:311–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Huprich JE, Fletcher JG, Alexander JA (2008) Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: Evaluation with 64-section multiphase CT enterography — initial experience. Radiology 246:562–571

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed tomography — an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 357:2277–2284

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hara AK, Walker FB, Silva AC, Leighton JA (2009) Preliminary estimate of triphasic CT enterography performance in hemodynamically stable patients with suspected gastrointestinal bleeding. AJR 193:1252–1260

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Postgate A, Despott E, Burling D et al (2008) Significant small-bowel lesions detected by alternative diagnostic modalities after negative capsule endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 68:1209–1214

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Voderholzer WA, Beinhoelzl J, Rogalla P et al (2005) Small bowel involvement in Crohn’s disease: a prospective comparison of wireless capsule endoscopy and computed tomography enteroclysis. Gut 54:369–373

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Voderholzer WA, Ortner M, Rogalla P et al (2003) Diagnostic yield of wireless capsule enteroscopy in comparison with computed tomography enteroclysis. Endoscopy 35:1009–1014

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fillipone A, Cianci R, Milano A et al (2008) Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding and small bowel pathology) comparison between wireless capsule endoscopy and multidetector-row CT enteroclysis. Abdom Imaging 33:398–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Romano S, De Lutio E, Rollandi GA et al (2005) Multidetector computed tomography enteroclysis (MDCT-E) with neutral enteral and IV contrast enhancement in tumor detection. Eur Radiol 15:1178–1183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Maglinte DDT, Lappas JC, Heitcamp DE et al (2003) Technical refinements in enteroclysis. Radiol Clin North Am 41: 213–229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Boudiaf M, Jaff A, Soyer P et al (2004) Small-bowel diseases: Prospective evaluation of multi-detector row helical CT enteroclysis in 107 consecutive patients. Radiology 233:338–344

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pilleul F, Penigaud M, Milot L et al (2006) Possible smallbowel neoplasms: contrast-enhanced and water-enhanced multidetector CT enteroclysis. Radiology 241:796–801

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Walsh D, Bender G, Timmons H (1998) Comparison of computed tomography enteroclysis and traditional computed tomography in the setting of suspected partial small bowel obstruction. Emerg Radiol 5:29–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mannudeep K, Rizzo SMR, Novelline RA (2005) Technologic innovations in computer tomography dose reduction: implications in emergency settings. Emergency Radiology 11:127–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gollub, M.J. (2010). Small-Bowel Imaging: Pitfalls in Computed Tomography Enterography/Enteroclysis. In: Hodler, J., Zollikofer, C.L., Von Schulthess, G.K. (eds) Diseases of the Abdomen and Pelvis 2010–2013. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1637-8_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1637-8_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-1636-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-1637-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics