Impact of intestinal ultrasound with a portable system in the management of Crohn’s disease

Background Intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is a valid cross-sectional imaging technique for the evaluation of Crohn’s disease (CD). With advancements in technology, portable ultrasound systems are becoming widely available, and the inevitable change to their use by non-radiologist clinicians would be a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Gastroenterology Report 2021-10, Vol.9 (5), p.418-426
Hauptverfasser: Gonen, Can, Surmelioglu, Ali, Kochan, Koray, Ozer, Serhat, Aslan, Ekrem, Tilki, Metin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is a valid cross-sectional imaging technique for the evaluation of Crohn’s disease (CD). With advancements in technology, portable ultrasound systems are becoming widely available, and the inevitable change to their use by non-radiologist clinicians would be a valuable contribution to improving patient care. This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic yield of IUS examination performed by a gastroenterologist with a portable system as an adjunct imaging modality in the routine care of CD patients. Methods A total of 117 CD patients were assessed by IUS imaging. Pre- and post-IUS clinical-management decisions were recorded. The primary outcome was to evaluate the change in the patients’ clinical-management decision following the IUS examination. The diagnostic accuracy was compared against the reference decision reached via a multidisiplinary meeting after the evaluation of all patient-related data. The endoscopic disease activity was determined using the simple endoscopic score for Crohn's disease (SES-CD). Results The initial clinical-management decision was changed in 47 patients (40.2%) after the IUS examination (P = 0.001). The accuracy of patient-management decisions improved from 63.2% to 90.6% in comparison to reference decisions (P 
ISSN:2052-0034
2052-0034
DOI:10.1093/gastro/goaa088