ReviewBMC medicine2026
Imaging endpoints in inflammatory bowel disease: current evidence and future directions for ultrasound and MRI.
Review in BMC medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImaging has become a central and rapidly evolving domain in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) because it captures disease manifestations that extend beyond the mucosa and, therefore, beyond what can be visualized by endoscopy, including transmural inflammation, extraintestinal complications and small-bowel involvement that are not adequately assessed by conventional approaches. MAIN BODY: In this narrative review, we synthesize the latest evidence on non-invasive cross-sectional imaging-intestinal ultrasound (IUS) and magnetic resonance imaging/enterography (MRI/MRE)-and outline a pragmatic framework for integrating these modalities into clinical trials. The timing of this review reflects the recent publication of two major consensus statements that specifically address how IUS and MRI can be standardized and operationalized as trial endpoints. We first summarize recommended technical standards for acquisition and reporting. We then outline trial-ready definitions of response and remission for clinical trials using validated scores and discuss the emerging but still variably defined construct of transmural healing, understood as the resolution of inflammation across the full thickness of the bowel wall and increasingly associated with improved long-term outcomes. Building on these components, we propose a practical pathway to incorporate imaging from screening, through on-treatment monitoring at predefined windows to adjudicate response/remission, and, where appropriate, to evaluate transmural healing. We emphasize central reading, harmonized timing, and standardized data repositories to minimize bias.
conclusionEven though meaningful steps have been taken to integrate cross-sectional imaging, it remains essential to evaluate its use pragmatically in both trials and routine care. Furthermore, cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to determine whether widespread implementation is economically justified, and studies should examine whether incorporating IUS/MRI improves patient adherence to clinical trial protocols and follow-up compared with traditional assessment pathways.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.