Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostic advances in inflammatory bowel disease (imaging and laboratory)

  • Published:
Current Gastroenterology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Autoimmune and antimicrobial antibodies currently play only an adjunctive role in the diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Their sensitivity and specificity are not high enough to be relied upon alone to secure a diagnosis; however, their most promising role seems to be in identifying Crohn’s disease patients at a higher risk of progression to intestinal complications. Serum C-reactive protein (CRP) correlates well with other measures of biologic activity but not as well with clinical activity. CRP can help predict IBD relapses, and in patients with severely active ulcerative colitis may indicate which patients are most likely to progress to colectomy. Similarly, fecal lactoferrin and calprotectin are reasonably accurate and noninvasive measures of disease activity, can predict relapse, and identify a high-risk group among acute severe colitis patients. Capsule endoscopy is a highly sensitive tool that can be used in patients with suspected Crohn’s disease with a negative traditional workup, but lower specificity and the risk of capsule retention preclude first-line use. CT enterography can delineate the extent and severity of bowel inflammation and detect extraluminal findings. Magnetic resonance enterography is a radiation-free cross-sectional imaging alternative that is comparable to CT enterography in diagnostic accuracy.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Podolsky DK: Inflammatory bowel disease (1). N Engl J Med 1991, 325:928–937.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Silverberg MS, Satsangi J, Ahmad T, et al.: Toward an integrated clinical, molecular and serological classification of inflammatory bowel disease: report of a working party of the 2005 Montreal World Congress of Gastroenterology. Can J Gastroenterol 2005, 19(Suppl A):5A–36A.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baumgart DC, Carding SR: Inflammatory bowel disease: cause and immunobiology. Lancet 2007, 369:1627–1640.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Vermeire S, Vermeulen N, Van Assche G, et al.: (Auto)antibodies in inflammatory bowel diseases. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2008, 37:429–438.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gupta N, Cohen SA, Bostrom AG, et al.: Risk factors for initial surgery in pediatric patients with Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 2006, 130:1069–1077.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Papadakis KA, Yang H, Ippoliti A, et al.: Anti-flagellin (CBir1) phenotypic and genetic Crohn’s disease associations. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2007, 13:524–530.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ashorn S, Valineva T, Kaukinen K, et al.: Serological responses to microbial antigens in celiac disease patients during a gluten-free diet. J Clin Immunol 2009, 29:190–195.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Holstein A, Burmeister J, Plaschke A, et al.: Autoantibody profiles in microscopic colitis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006, 21:1016–1020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Muratori P, Muratori L, Guidi M, et al.: Anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibodies (ASCA) and autoimmune liver diseases. Clin Exp Immunol 2003, 132:473–476.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sakly W, Jeddi M, Ghedira I: Anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibodies in primary biliary cirrhosis. Dig Dis Sci 2008, 53:1983–1987.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Davis MK, Andres JM, Jolley CD, et al.: Antibodies to Escherichia coli outer membrane porin C in the absence of anti-Saccharomyces cerevesiae antibodies and anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies are an unreliable marker of Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2007, 45:409–413.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Markowitz J, Kugathasan S, Dubinsky M, et al.: Age of diagnosis influences serologic responses in children with Crohn’s disease: a possible clue to etiology? Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009, 15:714–719.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Iltanen S, Tervo L, Halttunen T, et al.: Elevated serum anti-I2 and anti-OmpW antibody levels in children with IBD. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2006, 12:389–394.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ashorn S, Honkanen T, Kolho KL, et al.: Fecal calprotectin levels and serological responses to microbial antigens among children and adolescents with inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009, 15:199–205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Vandewalle-El Khoury P, Colombel JF, Joossens S, et al.: Detection of antisynthetic mannoside antibodies (AsigmaMA) reveals heterogeneity in the ASCA response of Crohn’s disease patients and contributes to differential diagnosis, stratification, and prediction. Am J Gastroenterol 2008, 103:949–957.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Papp M, Altorjay I, Dotan N, et al.: New serological markers for inflammatory bowel disease are associated with earlier age at onset, complicated disease behavior, risk for surgery, and NOD2/CARD15 genotype in a Hungarian IBD cohort. Am J Gastroenterol 2008, 103:665–681.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ferrante M, Henckaerts L, Joossens M, et al.: New serological markers in inflammatory bowel disease are associated with complicated disease behaviour. Gut 2007, 56:1394–1403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Seow CH, Stempak JM, Xu W, et al.: Novel anti-glycan antibodies related to inflammatory bowel disease diagnosis and phenotype. Am J Gastroenterol 2009, 104:1426–1434.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dubinsky MC, Lin YC, Dutridge D, et al.: Serum immune responses predict rapid disease progression among children with Crohn’s disease: immune responses predict disease progression. Am J Gastroenterol 2006, 101:360–367.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Amre DK, Lu SE, Costea F, et al.: Utility of serological markers in predicting the early occurrence of complications and surgery in pediatric Crohn’s disease patients. Am J Gastroenterol 2006, 101:645–652.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Solberg IC, Lygren I, Cvancarova M, et al.: Predictive value of serological markers in a population-based Norwegian cohort with inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009, 15:406–414.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dubinsky MC, Kugathasan S, Mei L, et al.: Increased immune reactivity predicts aggressive complicating Crohn’s disease in children. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008, 6:1105–1111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hoie O, Aamodt G, Vermeire S, et al.: Serological markers are associated with disease course in ulcerative colitis. A study in an unselected population-based cohort followed for 10 years. J Crohn’s Colitis 2008, 2:114–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Melmed GY, Fleshner PR, Bardakcioglu O, et al.: Family history and serology predict Crohn’s disease after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis. Dis Colon Rectum 2008, 51:100–108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fleshner P, Ippoliti A, Dubinsky M, et al.: Both preoperative perinuclear antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody and anti-CBir1 expression in ulcerative colitis patients influence pouchitis development after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008, 6:561–568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ferrante M, Declerck S, Coopmans T, et al.: Development of pouchitis following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis: a role for serological markers and microbial pattern recognition receptor genes. J Crohn’s Colitis 2008, 2:142–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Vermeire S, Van Assche G, Rutgeerts P: Laboratory markers in IBD: useful, magic, or unnecessary toys? Gut 2006, 55:426–431.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Jones J, Chen LS, Baudhuin L, et al.: Relationships between C-reactive protein concentration and genotype in healthy volunteers. Clin Chem Lab Med 2009, 47:20–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jones J, Loftus EV, Panaccione R, et al.: Relationships between disease activity and serum and fecal biomarkers in patients with Crohn’s disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008, 6:1218–1224.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Karoui S, Ouerdiane S, Serghini M, et al.: Correlation between levels of C-reactive protein and clinical activity in Crohn’s disease. Dig Liver Dis 2007, 39:1006–1010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Maharshak N, Zilberman L, Arbel Y, et al.: Microin-flammation in patients with Crohn’s disease in clinical remission. J Crohn’s Colitis 2008, 2:310–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Koelewijn CL, Schwartz MP, Samsom M, et al.: C-reactive protein levels during a relapse of Crohn’s disease are associated with the clinical course of the disease. World J Gastroenterol 2008, 14:85–89.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bitton A, Dobkin PL, Edwardes MD, et al.: Predicting relapse in Crohn’s disease: a biopsychosocial model. Gut 2008, 57:1386–1392.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cacheux W, Seksik P, Lemann M, et al.: Predictive factors of response to cyclosporine in steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2008, 103:637–642.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Henriksen M, Jahnsen J, Lygren I, et al.: C-reactive protein: a predictive factor and marker of inflammation in inflammatory bowel disease. Results from a prospective population-based study. Gut 2008, 57:1518–1523.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Solberg IC, Lygren I, Jahnsen J, et al.: Clinical course during the first 10 years of ulcerative colitis: results from a population-based inception cohort (IBSEN Study). Scand J Gastroenterol 2009, 44:431–440.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. von Roon AC, Karamountzos L, Purkayastha S, et al.: Diagnostic precision of fecal calprotectin for inflammatory bowel disease and colorectal malignancy. Am J Gastroenterol 2007, 102:803–813.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Langhorst J, Elsenbruch S, Koelzer J, et al.: Noninvasive markers in the assessment of intestinal inflammation in inflammatory bowel diseases: performance of fecal lactoferrin, calprotectin, and PMN-elastase, CRP, and clinical indices. Am J Gastroenterol 2008, 103:162–169.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Quaill MA, Russell RK, Van Limbergen JE, et al.: Fecal calprotectin complements routine laboratory investigations in diagnosing childhood inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009, 15:756–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Joishy M, Davies I, Ahmed M, et al.: Fecal calprotectin and lactoferrin as noninvasive markers of pediatric inflammatory bowel disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2009, 48:48–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Schoepfer A, Beglinger C, Straumann A, et al.: Ulcerative colitis: fecal calprotectin correlates closely with the endoscopically assessed disease activity [abstract]. Gastroenterology 2009, 136 (Suppl 1):A34.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Sipponen T, Karkkainen P, Savilahti E, et al.: Correlation of faecal calprotectin and lactoferrin with an endoscopic score for Crohn’s disease and histologic findings. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2008, 28:1221–1229.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sipponen T, Savilahti E, Karkkainen P, et al.: Fecal calprotectin, lactoferrin, and endoscopic disease activity in monitoring anti-TNF-alpha therapy for Crohn’s disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2008, 14:1392–1398.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Diamanti A, Colistro F, Basso MS, et al.: Clinical role of calprotectin assay in determining histological relapses in children affected by inflammatory bowel diseases. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2008, 14:1229–1235.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Walkiewicz D, Werlin SL, Fish D, et al.: Fecal calprotectin is useful in predicting disease relapse in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2008, 14:669–673.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Scarpa M, D’Inca R, Basso D, et al.: Fecal lactoferrin and calprotectin after ileocolonic resection for Crohn’s disease. Dis Colon Rectum 2007, 50:861–869.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. D’Inca R, Dal Pont E, Di Leo V, et al.: Can calprotectin predict relapse risk in inflammatory bowel disease? Am J Gastroenterol 2008, 103:2007–2014.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Wagner M, Peterson CGB, Ridefelt P, et al.: Fecal markers of inflammation used as surrogate markers for treatment outcome in relapsing inflammatory bowel disease. World J Gastroenterol 2008, 14:5585–5589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Lamb CA, Mohiuddin MK, Gicquel J, et al.: Faecal calprotectin or lactoferrin can identify postoperative recurrence in Crohn’s disease. Br J Surg 2009, 96:663–674.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ho GT, Lee HM, Brydon G, et al.: Fecal calprotectin predicts the clinical course of acute severe ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2009, 104:673–678.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Triester SL, Leighton JA, Leontiadis GI, et al.: A metaanalysis of the yield of capsule endoscopy compared to other diagnostic modalities in patients with non-stricturing small bowel Crohn’s disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2006, 101:954–964.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Fidder HH, Nadler M, Lahat A, et al.: The utility of capsule endoscopy in the diagnosis of Crohn’s disease based on patient’s symptoms. J Clin Gastroenterol 2007, 41:384–387.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. De Bona M, Bellumat A, Cian E, et al.: Capsule endoscopy findings in patients with suspected Crohn’s disease and biochemical markers of inflammation. Dig Liver Dis 2006, 38:331–335.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Valle J, Alcantara M, Perez-Grueso MJ, et al.: Clinical features of patients with negative results from traditional diagnostic work-up and Crohn’s disease findings from capsule endoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol 2006, 40:692–696.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Salunke S, Rae N, Morris AJ: Diagnostic yield of wireless capsule endoscopy in patients with elevated fecal calprotectin and normal endo-colonoscopy [abstract]. Gastroenterology 2008, 134(Suppl):A351.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Biancone L, Calabrese E, Petruzziello C, et al.: Wireless capsule endoscopy and small intestine contrast ultrasonography in recurrence of Crohn’s disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2007, 13:1256–1265.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Li F, Gurudu SR, De Petris G, et al.: Retention of the capsule endoscope: a single-center experience of 1000 capsule endoscopy procedures. Gastrointest Endosc 2008, 68:174–180.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Levesque BG, Cipriano SL, Chang KK, et al.: Cost-effectiveness of alternative diagnostic strategies for patients with suspected small-bowel Crohn’s disease [abstract]. Gastroenterology 2009, 136(Suppl 1):A100.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Bourreille A, Ignjatovic A, Aabakken L, et al.: Role of small-bowel endoscopy in the management of patients with inflammatory bowel disease: an international OMED-ECCO consensus. Endoscopy 2009, 41:618–637.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Mehdizadeh S, Ross A, Gerson L, et al.: What is the learning curve associated with double-balloon enteroscopy? Technical details and early experience in 6 U.S. tertiary care centers. Gastrointest Endosc 2006, 64:740–750.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Wiarda B, Mensik P, Heine DG, et al.: Small bowel imaging comparing MR enteroclysis, capsule endoscopy and doubleballoon enteroscopy in patients with (suspected) Crohn’s disease: the COMRADE study [abstract]. Gastroenterology 2009, 136(Suppl):A131.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Pasha SF, Leighton JA, Das A, et al.: Double-balloon enteroscopy and capsule endoscopy have comparable diagnostic yield in small-bowel disease: a meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008, 6:671–676.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Paulsen SR, Huprich JE, Fletcher JG, et al.: CT enterography as a diagnostic tool in evaluating small bowel disorders: review of clinical experience with over 700 cases. Radiographics 2006, 26:641–657.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Baker ME, Walter J, Obuchowski NA, et al.: Mural attenuation in normal small bowel and active inflammatory Crohn’s disease on CT enterography: location, absolute attenuation, relative attenuation, and the effect of wall thickness. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009, 192:417–423.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Bodily KD, Fletcher JG, Solem CA, et al.: Crohn disease: mural attenuation and thickness at contrast-enhanced CT enterography-correlation with endoscopic and histologic findings of inflammation. Radiology 2006, 238:505–516.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Bruining DH, Siddiki HA, Fletcher JG, et al.: Prevalence of penetrating disease and extraintestinal manifestations of Crohn’s disease detected with CT enterography. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2008, 14:1701–1706.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Peloquin JM, Pardi DS, Sandborn WJ, et al.: Diagnostic ionizing radiation exposure in a population-based cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2008, 103:2015–2022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Desmond AN, O’Regan K, Curran C, et al.: Crohn’s disease: factors associated with exposure to high levels of diagnostic radiation. Gut 2008, 57:1524–1529.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Gourtsoyiannis NC, Grammatikakis J, Papamastorakis G, et al.: Imaging of small intestinal Crohn’s disease: comparison between MR enteroclysis and conventional enteroclysis. Eur Radiol 2006, 16:1915–1925.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Horsthuis K, Stokkers PCF, Stoker J: Detection of inflammatory bowel disease: diagnostic performance of cross-sectional imaging modalities. Abdom Imaging 2008, 33:407–416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Segarajasingam DS, Weltman C, Philpott J, et al.: Can MRI enteroclysis distinguish inflammatory changes from fibrosis in small bowel Crohn’s disease? [abstract]. Gastroenterology 2007, 132(Suppl):A499.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Ryan ER, Heaslip ISE: Magnetic resonance enteroclysis compared with conventional enteroclysis and computed tomography enteroclysis: a critically appraised topic. Abdom Imaging 2008, 33:34–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Siddiki HA, Fidler JL, Fletcher JG, et al.: Prospective comparison of state-of-the-art MR enterography and CT enterography in small-bowel Crohn’s disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009, 193:113–121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Horsthuis K, Bipat S, Bennink RJ, et al.: Inflammatory bowel disease diagnosed with US, MR, scintigraphy, and CT: metaanalysis of prospective studies. Radiology 2008, 247:64–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street, SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Edward V. Loftus Jr

Authors
  1. Maria E. Moscandrew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edward V. Loftus Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edward V. Loftus Jr.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moscandrew, M.E., Loftus, E.V. Diagnostic advances in inflammatory bowel disease (imaging and laboratory). Curr Gastroenterol Rep 11, 488–495 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-009-0074-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-009-0074-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation