Dr Jost Langhorst and colleagues from Germany assessed the diagnostic accuracy of MR colonography without bowel cleansing regarding its ability to quantify inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
In addition, patient acceptance was compared with conventional colonoscopy.
The investigators evaluated 29 patients with IB, of which 17 had ulcerative colitis and 12 had Crohn's disease.
Conventional colonoscopy was performed after bowel cleansing as the gold standard.
MR colonography was based on a fecal tagging technique and performed 48 to 72 hours prior to conventional colonoscopy.
The investigative team rated the presence of inflammation in each of 7 ileocolonic segments for every procedure.
Patients evaluated both modalities and dedicated aspects of the examination according to a 10-point-scale, with 10 equal to poor acceptance.
| Overall sensitivity of MR colonography in a segment-based detection was 32%|
|Inflammatory Bowel Diseases|
Furthermore, preferences for future examinations were investigated.
The team found inflammatory segments by means of conventional colonoscopy in 23 and by MR colonography in 14 patients.
Overall sensitivity and specificity of MR colonography in a segment-based detection were 32% and 88%, respectively.
Concerning severely inflamed segments, the team observed that sensitivity increased to 53% for MR colonography.
The investigators found that overall acceptance of conventional colonoscopy was significantly higher compared to MR colonography.
For MR colonography, the placement of the rectal tube, and for conventional colonoscopy bowel purgation, were rated as the most unpleasant.
The team noted that a total of 67% of patients voted for conventional colonoscopy as the favorable tool for future examinations.
Dr Langhorst's team concludes, "The presented data indicate that fecal tagging MR colonography is not suitable for an adequate quantification of inflammatory diseases of the large bowel."
"Furthermore, overall acceptance of endoscopic colonoscopy was superior to MR colonography."