Diagnostic accuracy of non-contrast magnetic resonance enterography in detecting active bowel inflammation in pediatric patients with diagnosed or suspected inflammatory bowel disease to determine necessity of gadolinium-based contrast agents.

backgroundPediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of gadolinium deposition given the potential need for multiple contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) exams over their lifetime.

objectiveTo determine whether gadolinium-based contrast agents are necessary in assessing active bowel inflammation on MRE in pediatric patients with known or suspected IBD. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a retrospective study of 77 patients (7-18 years; 68.8% male) with known (n=58) or suspected (n=19) IBD and endoscopy with biopsy performed within 30 days of MRE without and with contrast evaluated bowel and non-bowel findings. During three visual analysis sessions, two radiologists reviewed pre-, post-, and pre-/post-contrast MRE images. A third radiologist independently reviewed 27 studies to assess inter-reader reliability. We used Cohen kappa (κ), Fleiss kappa, (κ

resultsThe pre- and pre-/post-contrast-enhanced MRE vs. combined endoscopic/histopathological results had moderate agreement (85.7%; κ 0.713, P<0.001; P-value 0.549). Compared to combined endoscopy/histopathology, pre- vs. pre-/post-contrast sensitivity (67%, confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.79 vs. 67%, CI 0.53-0.79) and specificity (80%, CI 0.59-0.92 vs. 68%, CI 0.46-0.84) varied little (κ 0.42, P<0.001 and κ 0.32, P=0.003, respectively). The three readers had moderate agreement (85.2%; κ 0.695, P=0.001; P-value 0.625). More penetrating complications were identified following contrast administration (P-value 0.04).

conclusionUse of a contrast agent does not improve the detection of active inflammation in the terminal ileum and colon compared to non-contrast MRE, although use of a contrast agent does aid in the detection of penetrating disease.