Semiautomatic Assessment of the Terminal Ileum and Colon in Patients with Crohn Disease Using MRI (the VIGOR++ Project)

Rationale and Objectives: The objective of this study was to develop and validate a predictive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity score for ileocolonic Crohn disease activity based on both subjective and semiautomatic MRI features. Materials and Methods: An MRI activity score (the “virtual gastrointestinal tract [VIGOR]” score) was developed from 27 validated magnetic resonance enterography datasets, including subjective radiologist observation of mural T2 signal and semiautomatic measurements of bowel wall thickness, excess volume, and dynamic contrast enhancement (initial slope of increase). A second subjective score was developed based on only radiologist observations. For validation, two observers applied both scores and three existing scores to a prospective dataset of 106 patients (59 women, median age 33) with known Crohn disease, using the endoscopic Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) as a reference standard. Results: The VIGOR score (17.1 × initial slope of increase + 0.2 × excess volume + 2.3 × mural T2) and other activity scores all had comparable correlation to the CDEIS scores (observer 1: r = 0.58 and 0.59, and observer 2: r = 0.34–0.40 and 0.43–0.51, respectively). The VIGOR score, however, improved interobserver agreement compared to the other activity scores (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.81 vs 0.44–0.59). A diagnostic accuracy of 80%–81% was seen for the VIGOR score, similar to the other scores. Conclusions: The VIGOR score achieves comparable accuracy to conventional MRI activity scores, but with significantly improved reproducibility, favoring its use for disease monitoring and therapy evaluation

Comparison of contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MRI in assessment of the terminal ileum in Crohn’s disease patients

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to compare the performance of contrast-enhanced (CE)-MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DW)-MRI in grading Crohn’s disease activity of the terminal ileum. Methods: Three readers evaluated CE-MRI, DW-MRI, and their combinations (CE/DW-MRI and DW/CE-MRI, depending on which protocol was used at the start of evaluation). Disease severity grading scores were correlated to the Crohn’s Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS). Diagnostic accuracy, severity grading, and levels of confidence were compared between imaging protocols and interobserver agreement was calculated. Results: Sixty-one patients were included (30 female, median age 36). Diagnostic accuracy for active disease for CE-MRI, DW-MRI, CE/DW-MRI, and DW/CE-MRI ranged between 0.82 and 0.85, 0.75 and 0.83, 0.79 and 0.84, and 0.74 and 0.82, respectively. Severity grading correlation to CDEIS ranged between 0.70 and 0.74, 0.66 and 0.70, 0.69 and 0.75, and 0.67 and 0.74, respectively. For each reader, CE-MRI values were consistently higher than DW-MRI, albeit not significantly. Confidence levels for all readers were significantly higher for CE-MRI compared to DW-MRI (P < 0.001). Further increased confidence was seen when using combined imaging protocols. Conclusions: There was no significant difference of CE-MRI and DW-MRI in determining disease activity, but the higher confidence levels may favor CE-MRI. DW-MRI is a good alternative in cases with relative contraindications for the use of intravenous contrast medium.ImPhys/Quantitative Imagin

Yield of Screening for COVID-19 in Asymptomatic Patients Before Elective or Emergency Surgery Using Chest CT and RT-PCR (SCOUT): Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE: To determine the yield of preoperative screening for COVID-19 with chest CT and RT-PCR in patients without COVID-19 symptoms. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Many centers are currently screening surgical patients for COVID-19 using either chest CT, RT-PCR or both, due to the risk for worsened surgical outcomes and nosocomial spread. The optimal design and yield of such a strategy are currently unknown. METHODS: This multicenter study included consecutive adult patients without COVID-19 symptoms who underwent preoperative screening using chest CT and RT-PCR before elective or emergency surgery under general anesthesia. RESULTS: A total of 2093 patients without COVID-19 symptoms were included in 14 participating centers; 1224 were screened by CT and RT-PCR and 869 by chest CT only. The positive yield of screening using a combination of chest CT and RT-PCR was 1.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8-2.1]. Individual yields were 0.7% (95% CI: 0.2-1.1) for chest CT and 1.1% (95% CI: 0.6-1.7) for RT-PCR; the incremental yield of chest CT was 0.4%. In relation to COVID-19 community prevalence, up to ∼6% positive RT-PCR was found for a daily hospital admission rate >1.5 per 100,000 inhabitants, and around 1.0% for lower prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: One in every 100 patients without COVID-19 symptoms tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 with RT-PCR; this yield increased in conjunction with community prevalence. The added value of chest CT was limited. Preoperative screening allowed us to take adequate precautions for SARS-CoV-2 positive patients in a surgical population, whereas negative patients needed only routine procedures

Yield of Screening for COVID-19 in Asymptomatic Patients Before Elective or Emergency Surgery Using Chest CT and RT-PCR (SCOUT): Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE: To determine the yield of preoperative screening for COVID-19 with chest CT and RT-PCR in patients without COVID-19 symptoms. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Many centers are currently screening surgical patients for COVID-19 using either chest CT, RT-PCR or both, due to the risk for worsened surgical outcomes and nosocomial spread. The optimal design and yield of such a strategy are currently unknown. METHODS: This multicenter study included consecutive adult patients without COVID-19 symptoms who underwent preoperative screening using chest CT and RT-PCR before elective or emergency surgery under general anesthesia. RESULTS: A total of 2093 patients without COVID-19 symptoms were included in 14 participating centers; 1224 were screened by CT and RT-PCR and 869 by chest CT only. The positive yield of screening using a combination of chest CT and RT-PCR was 1.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8-2.1]. Individual yields were 0.7% (95% CI: 0.2-1.1) for chest CT and 1.1% (95% CI: 0.6-1.7) for RT-PCR; the incremental yield of chest CT was 0.4%. In relation to COVID-19 community prevalence, up to ∼6% positive RT-PCR was found for a daily hospital admission rate >1.5 per 100,000 inhabitants, and around 1.0% for lower prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: One in every 100 patients without COVID-19 symptoms tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 with RT-PCR; this yield increased in conjunction with community prevalence. The added value of chest CT was limited. Preoperative screening allowed us to take adequate precautions for SARS-CoV-2 positive patients in a surgical population, whereas negative patients needed only routine procedures