4.4 Article

Radiological Response Is Associated with Better Outcomes and Should Be Considered a Therapeutic Target in Crohn's Disease

期刊

DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES
卷 65, 期 9, 页码 2664-2674

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-019-05979-8

关键词

Crohn's disease; Disease complications; Magnetic resonance enterography; Transmural healing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background The aim of the study was to identify factors associated with a radiological response and to assess the impact of radiological improvement in long-term outcomes in small bowel (SB) Crohn's disease (CD) patients. Methods We performed a retrospective study from June 2011 to June 2017 in the tertiary center, Claude Huriez Hospital in Lille, France. All SB CD patients, who underwent two magnetic resonance enterographies (MRE) 3-12 months apart, with at least 1-year follow-up after the second MRE, were included. Signs of radiological inflammation were identified by two expert radiologists in CD. Patients were classified as radiological responders (RR) and non-responders (NR). Hospitalization rates, adjustment of treatment, and surgical or endoscopic interventions were assessed and compared between RR and NR. Factors associated with a radiological response were also studied using the Cox model. Results One hundred and fifteen SB CD patients were included with a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 11.6-28.3). There were 54 (47%) RR and 61 (53%) NR. The risk of surgical or endoscopic intervention was higher in NR than RR (p = 0.04), and the median delay until a surgical or endoscopic intervention was shorter in NR (p = 0.04). Multifocal disease, a hypersignal on diffusion-weighted or dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging, a stricture, or a fistula was significantly associated with a decreased probability of a radiological response (p < 0.05). Conclusion This study shows that a radiological response is associated with a decreased risk of surgical or endoscopic intervention and should be considered as a therapeutic target in CD patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据