Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 38, Issue 5, pp 497–510 | Cite as

Fluoroscopic and CT enteroclysis in children: initial experience, technical feasibility, and utility

  • Shanaree Brown
  • Kimberly E. Applegate
  • Kumar Sandrasegaran
  • S. Greg Jennings
  • Joshua Garrett
  • Arunan Skantharajah
  • Dean T. Maglinte
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Partial small-bowel obstruction can be difficult to diagnose on clinical examination. These obstructions might not be detected on routine abdominal/pelvic CT.

Objective

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and techniques of fluoroscopic enteroclysis (FE) and CT enteroclysis (CTE), and to review their indications and findings in children.

Materials and methods

We retrospectively reviewed all enteroclysis studies in children younger than 18 years performed between January 2002 and March 2007. We correlated the results with other abdominal imaging and surgical and pathological findings.

Results

The review revealed 112 FE and 74 CTE studies performed in 175 children (mean age 14 years, range 3–18 years). FE and CTE studies were performed most commonly for evaluation of known Crohn disease (FE 38%, CTE 29%) and abdominal pain (FE 26%, CTE 26%). One FE study was terminated because of patient anxiety, and one CTE study was terminated because of patient discomfort. No complications of FE or CTE were reported. The findings were normal in 54% of the FE studies and 46% of the CTE studies. The most common small bowel diagnoses were Crohn disease (FE 34%, CTE 28%) and partial small bowel obstruction (FE 3%, CTE 10%). Two FE studies (2%) and 14 CTE studies (19%) showed abnormalities outside the small bowel. In 54 patients with inflammatory bowel disease, 11 FE studies and 25 CTE studies showed additional bowel abnormalities. Overall, 14 and 21 patients had surgery as a result of the findings of FE and CTE, respectively.

Conclusion

FE and CTE are safe, feasible, and accurate in depicting small-bowel pathology in children. These techniques can be particularly useful in children with Crohn disease involving the small bowel.

Keywords

Fluoroscopic enteroclysis CT enteroclysis Children Crohn disease Small bowel obstruction 

References

  1. 1.
    Maglinte DD, Sandrasegaran K, Tann M (2006) Advances in alimentary tract imaging. World J Gastroenterol 12:3139–3145PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Paulsen SR, Huprich JE, Fletcher JG et al (2006) CT enterography as a diagnostic tool in evaluating small bowel disorders: review of clinical experience with over 700 cases. Radiographics 26:641–657, discussion 657–662PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    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 55:1561–1567PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bodily KD, Fletcher JG, Solem CA et al (2006) Crohn’s disease: mural attenuation and thickness at contrast-enhanced CT enterography – correlation with endoscopic and histologic findings of inflammation. Radiology 238:505–516PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruining DH, Loftus EV (2006) Evolving diagnostic strategies for inflammatory bowel disease. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 8:478–485PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Godefroy C, Pilleul F, Dugougeat F et al (2005) Value of contrast-enhanced MR enterography in pediatric Crohn’s disease: preliminary study. J Radiol 86:1685–1692PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marmo R, Rotondano G, Piscopo R et al (2005) Capsule endoscopy versus enteroclysis in the detection of small-bowel involvement in Crohn’s disease: a prospective trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 3:772–776PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chong AK, Taylor A, Miller A et al (2005) Capsule endoscopy vs. push enteroscopy and enteroclysis in suspected small-bowel Crohn’s disease. Gastrointest Endosc 61:255–261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    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 54:369–373PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goldfarb NI, Pizzi LT, Fuhr JP et al (2004) Diagnosing Crohn’s disease: an economic analysis comparing wireless capsule endoscopy with traditional diagnostic procedures. Dis Manag 7:292–304PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Golder SK, Schreyer AG, Endlicher E et al (2006) Comparison of capsule endoscopy and magnetic resonance (MR) enteroclysis in suspected small bowel disease. Int J Colorectal Dis 21:97–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hara AK, Leighton JA, Heigh RI et al (2006) Crohn’s disease of the small bowel: preliminary comparison among CT enterography, capsule endoscopy, small-bowel follow-through, and ileoscopy. Radiology 238:128–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maglinte DD (2005) Capsule imaging and the role of radiology in the investigation of diseases of the small bowel. Radiology 236:763–767PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guilhon de Araujo Sant’Anna AM, Dubois J, Miron M et al (2005) Wireless capsule endoscopy for obscure small-bowel disorders: final results of the first pediatric controlled trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 3:264–270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Herlinger H, Maglinte D (1989) Historical aspects. In: Herlinger H, Maglinte D (eds) Clinical radiology of the small intestine. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 41–44Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Minordi LM, Vecchioli A, Guidi L et al (2006) Multidetector CT enteroclysis versus barium enteroclysis with methylcellulose in patients with suspected small bowel disease. Eur Radiol 16:1527–1536PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Köppel R, Thiele J, Bosse J (1992) The Sellink CT method. Rofo 156:291–292Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schmidt S, Felley C, Meuwly J et al (2006) CT enteroclysis: technique and clinical applications. Eur Radiol 16:648–660PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sailer J, Peloschek P, Schober E et al (2005) Diagnostic value of CT enteroclysis compared with conventional enteroclysis in patients with Crohn’s disease. AJR 185:1575–1581PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gourtsoyiannis NC, Papanikolaou N, Karantanas A (2006) Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of small intestinal Crohn’s disease. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 20:137–156PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Masselli G, Brizi MG, Menchini L et al (2005) Magnetic resonance enteroclysis imaging of Crohn’s. Radiol Med (Torino) 110:221–233Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Albert JG, Martiny F, Krummenerl A et al (2005) Diagnosis of small bowel Crohn’s disease: a prospective comparison of capsule endoscopy with magnetic resonance imaging and fluoroscopic enteroclysis. Gut 54:1721–1727PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Negaard A, Sandvik L, Mulahasanovic A et al (2006) Magnetic resonance enteroclysis in the diagnosis of small-intestinal Crohn’s disease: diagnostic accuracy and inter- and intra-observer agreement. Acta Radiol 47:1008–1016PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    E-Z-EM (2008) VoLumen: bowel marker for MDCT and PET/CT studies. http://www.ezem.com/ct_imaging/VoLumen.htm. Accessed 15 Jan 2008
  25. 25.
    Rajesh A, Maglinte DD (2006) Multislice CT enteroclysis: technique and clinical applications. Clin Radiol 61:31–39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Barloon TJ, Lu CC, Honda H et al (1994) Does a normal small bowel enteroclysis exclude small bowel disease? A long-term follow-up of consecutive normal studies. Abdom Imaging 19:113–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Grossman AB, Mamula P (2007) Crohn disease. Emedicine. Last updated 18 Dec 2007. http://www.emedicine.com/ped/topic507.htm. Accessed 15 Jan 2008
  28. 28.
    Schulmann K, Hollerbach S, Kraus K et al (2005) Feasibility and diagnostic utility of video capsule endoscopy for the detection of small bowel polyps in patients with hereditary polyposis syndromes. Am J Gastroenterol 100:27–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tomei E, Semelka RC, Braga L et al (2006) Adult celiac disease: what is the role of MRI? J Magn Reson Imaging 24:625–629PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wiarda BM, Kuipers EJ, Heitbrink MA et al (2006) MR enteroclysis of inflammatory small-bowel diseases. AJR 187:522–531PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sandrasegaran K, Maglinte DD, Howard TJ (2003) The multifaceted role of radiology in small bowel obstruction. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 24:319–335PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pilleul F, Penigaud M, Milot L et al (2006) Possible small-bowel neoplasms: contrast-enhanced and water-enhanced multidetector CT enteroclysis. Radiology 241:796–801PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    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 15:1178–1183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    NCRP (1990) Implementation of the principle of as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) for medical and dental personnel. Report 107. NCRP, Bethesda, MDGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bender GN, Timmons JH, Williard WC et al (1996) Computed tomographic enteroclysis: one methodology. Invest Radiol 31:43–49PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Caoili EM, Paulson EK (2000) CT of small-bowel obstruction: another perspective using multiplanar reformations. AJR 174:993–998PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Maglinte DD, Bender GN, Heitkamp DE et al (2003) Multidetector-row helical CT enteroclysis. Radiol Clin North Am 41:249–262PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Horton KM, Fishman EK (2003) The current status of multidetector row CT and three-dimensional imaging of the small bowel. Radiol Clin North Am 41:199–212PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gollub MJ (2005) Multidetector computed tomography enteroclysis of patients with small bowel obstruction: a volume rendered “surgical perspective.” J Comput Assist Tomogr 29:401–407PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shanaree Brown
    • 1
    • 5
  • Kimberly E. Applegate
    • 2
    • 3
  • Kumar Sandrasegaran
    • 3
  • S. Greg Jennings
    • 3
  • Joshua Garrett
    • 3
  • Arunan Skantharajah
    • 4
  • Dean T. Maglinte
    • 3
  1. 1.Indiana University School of MedicineIndianapolisUSA
  2. 2.Section of Pediatric RadiologyRiley Hospital for ChildrenIndianapolisUSA
  3. 3.Department of Radiology, Indiana University School of MedicineRiley Hospital for ChildrenIndianapolisUSA
  4. 4.Indiana UniversityIndianapolisUSA
  5. 5.Department of RadiologyUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations