Crohn’s disease is a chronic, transmural inflammatory process of the gastrointestinal tract. It often affects the colon with the perianal area. The most common intestinal manifestations include external and/or internal fistulas and abscesses. Assessment of the activity of perianal fistulas in the course of Crohn’s disease seems to be an important factor influencing therapeutic approach. Fistula’s activity is evaluated by such methods as magnetic resonance imaging, anal ultrasound and examination under anaesthesia. Usefulness of imaging methods in the diagnosis of fistulas still remains to be defined.
MRI is used to present a wide spectrum of perianal fistulazing Crohn’s disease. Additionally, it is an important instrument revealing location, extent and severity of inflammation. It is also very helpful to detect clinically silent sepsis related to small, local inflammation. The most common method used in MR imaging to assess topography of a fistula’s track, is Parks’ classification.
Clinical indications to MRI may include follow-up studies of a diagnosed disease, classification of fistulas’ subtypes in the course of Crohn’s disease, determination of the extent of fistulas’ tracts and spread of an inflammatory process what can guide surgical procedures.
Crohn’s disease Perianal fistulas MRI Digestive system
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access
We acknowledge Dorota Borowska in preparing the figures and diagrams.
Young Y, Abreu MT. (2006) Advances in the pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 8: 470–477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz DA, Loftus EV Jr, Tremaine WJ, Panaccione R, Harmsen WS, Zinsmeister AR, Sandborn WJ. (2002) The natural history of fistulizing Crohn’s disease in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Gastroenterology. 122: 875–880PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hellers G, Bergstrand O, Ewerth S, Holmstrom B. (1980) Occurrence and outcome after primary treatment of anal fistulae in Crohn’s disease. Gut. 1980; 21:525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz DA, Wiersema MJ, Dudiak KM, et al. (2000) A comparison of endoscopic ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and exam under anesthesia for evaluation of Crohn’s perianal fistulas. Gastroenterology; 121: 1064–1072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bressler B, Sands BE. (2006) Review article: Medical therapy for fistulizing Crohn’s disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 24: 1283–1293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan G, Halligan S, Williams A, et al. (2002) Effect of MRI on clinical outcome of recurrent fistula-in-ano. Lancet 360:1661–1662PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandborn WJ, Fazio VW, Feagan BG, et al. (2003) AGA technical review on perianal Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 125: 1508–1530PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Present DH, Rutgeerts P, Targan S, et al. (1999) Infliximab for the treatment of fistulas in patients with Crohn’s disease. N Engl J Med 340: 1398–1405PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sands BE, Anderson FH, Bernstein CN, et al. (2004) Infliximab maintenance therapy for fistulizing Crohn’s disease. N Engl J Med 350: 876–885PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandborn WJ, Feagan BG, Hanauer SB, et al. (2002) A review of activity indices and efficacy endpoints for clinical trials of medical therapy in adults with Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 122:512–530PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell SJ, Halligan S, Windsor AC, et al. (2003) Response of fistulating Crohn’s disease to infliximab treatment assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 17:387–393PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Gastroenterological Association. (2003) AGA technical review on perianal Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 125: 1508–1530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irvine EJ. (1995) Usual therapy improves perianal Crohn’s disease as measured by a new disease activity index. J Clin Gastroenterol 20: 27–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caprilli R, Viscido A, Guagnozzi D. (2002) Review article: biological agents in the treatment of Crohn’s disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 16: 579–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuijpers HC, Schulpen T. (1985) Fistulography for fistula-in-ano. Is it useful? Dis Colon Rectum. 28: 103–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furukawa A, Saotome T, Yamasaki M, Maeda K, Nitta N, Takahashi M, Tsujikawa T, Fujiyama Y, Murata K, Sakamoto T (2004) Cross-sectional imaging in Crohn disease. Radiographics. 24: 689–702PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choen S, Burnett S, Bartram CI, Nicholls RJ. (1991) Comparison between anal endosonography and digital examination in the evaluation of anal fistulae. Br J Surg. 78: 445–447PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beets-Tan RG, Beets GL, van der Hoop AG, Kessels AG, Vliegen RF, Baeten CG, van Engelshoven JM. (2001) Preoperative MR imaging of anal fistulas: Does it really help the surgeon? Radiology. 218: 75–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
Haggett PJ, Moore NR, Shearman JD, Travis SP, Jewell DP, Mortensen NJ. (1995) Pelvic and perineal complications of Crohn’s disease: assessment using magnetic resonance imaging. Gut 36: 407–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris J, Spencer JA, Ambrose NS. (2000) MR imaging classification of perianal fistulas and its implications for patient management. Radiographics. 20: 623–635PubMedGoogle Scholar
Horsthuis K, Stoker J. (2004) MRI of perianal Crohn’s Disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 183: 1309–1315PubMedGoogle Scholar
Buchanan GN, Halligan S, Taylor S, Williams A, Cohen R, Bartram C. (2004) MRI of fistula in ano: inter- and intraobserver agreement and effects of directed education. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 183:135–140PubMedGoogle Scholar