Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cross-sectional imaging supplements endoscopy in detecting disease manifestations in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of PET/MRI in a paediatric population suspected of IBD. This prospective study consecutively included patients aged 8–17 years under diagnostic evaluation for IBD. Forty-three patients underwent a PET/MRI scan and subsequent ileocolonoscopy, of whom 26 patients diagnosed with IBD participated in a follow-up scan, hereof 19 with Crohn's disease (CD), five with Ulcerative colitis and two with unclassified IBD. The results of PET alone, MRI alone, and PET/MRI combined were compared to a reference standard of endoscopy and histopathology. Of the 208 intestinal segments analysed, 109 showed inflammation, and 99 had no inflammation. In the per-segment analysis PET had a sensitivity of 0.83 (95% CI 0.73–0.93), specificity of 0.59 (95% CI 0.47–0.71), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.73 (95% CI 0.67–0.80). MRI had a sensitivity of 0.52 (95% CI 0.41–0.64), specificity 0.89 (95% CI 0.82–0.96), and AUROC of 0.72 (95% CI 0.66–0.77). PET/MRI had a sensitivity of 0.83 (95% CI 0.74–0.94), specificity of 0.57 (95% CI 0.44–0.69), and AUROC of 0.77 (95% CI 0.71–0.84). At follow-up, PET and MRI scores decreased, and the change in MRI was able to identify patients with a clinical response. The accuracy of the PET/MRI scan in detecting inflammation in the terminal ileum and colon was moderate and not superior to either modality alone. With technological advances and combined reading, PET/MRI may still be valuable in selected cases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dalby et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: