Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17483955›Full record

Trial reportEuropean radiology2007

A prospective randomized comparison between two MRI studies of the small bowel in Crohn's disease, the oral contrast method and MR enteroclysis.

Anne Negaard, Vemund Paulsen, Leiv Sandvik, Audun Elnaes Berstad, Arne Borthne, Kirsti Try, Idar Lygren, Tryggve Storaas, Nils-Einar Klow

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European radiology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03541733 (The Bowel Preparation for Magnetic Resonance Enterography), which is not on this map. Cited by 68 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03541733 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

The Bowel Preparation for Magnetic Resonance Enterography: a Open Label, Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe Second Hospital of Nanjing Medical UniversityRan2018 to 2023Enrolled102ConditionsCrohn DiseaseArmsmid-gut tubing
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

68 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Imaging of Strictures in Crohn's Disease.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Inflammatory bowel disease biomarkers.Medicinal research reviews · 2022
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Assessment of Imaging Features of Crohn's Disease with MR Enterography.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Anne NegaardDepartment of Radiology, Ullevål University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Kirkeveien 166, 0407 Oslo, Norway. anne.negard@medisin.uio.no
Vemund Paulsen
Leiv Sandvik
Audun Elnaes Berstad
Arne Borthne
Kirsti Try
Idar Lygren
Tryggve Storaas
Nils-Einar Klow

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim was to compare bowel distension and diagnostic properties of magnetic resonance imaging of the small bowel with oral contrast (MRI per OS) with magnetic resonance enteroclysis (MRE). Forty patients with suspected Crohn's disease (CD) were examined with both MRI methods. MRI per OS was performed with a 6% mannitol solution and MRE with nasojejunal intubation and a polyethylenglycol solution. MRI protocol consisted of balanced fast field echo (B-FFE), T2 and T1 sequences with and without gadolinium. Two experienced radiologists individually evaluated bowel distension and pathological findings including wall thickness (BWT), contrast enhancement (BWE), ulcer (BWU), stenosis (BWS) and edema (EDM). The diameter of the small bowel was smaller with MRI per OS than with MRE (difference jejunum: 0.55 cm, p < 0.001; ileum: 0.35 cm, p < 0.001, terminal ileum: 0.09 cm, p = 0.08). However, CD was diagnosed with high diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values: MRI per OS 88%, 89%, 89%, 89%; MRE 88%, 84%, 82%, 89%) and inter-observer agreement (MRI per OS k = 0.95; MRE k = 1). In conclusion, bowel distension was inferior in MRI per OS compared to MRE. However, both methods diagnosed CD with a high diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility.

Indexed as

Intestine, SmallAdministration, OralAdolescentAdultContrast MediaCrohn DiseaseFemaleHumansIntubation, GastrointestinalMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityContrast Media

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.