Update on MR Enterography PMA GI Conference January 4, 2011 Alvin Yamamoto, MD Commonwealth...

Update on MR Enterography

PMA GI Conference January 4, 2011

Alvin Yamamoto, MDCommonwealth Radiology Associates

Disclosure

• No financial disclosures

Introduction

• MR enterography (MRE) is a focused evaluation of the small bowel and surrounding soft tissues

• Aim of this presentation is to discuss MRE for evaluation of pts with known or suspected Crohns disease

What is the best radiologic study?

• Fluoroscopy– Small bowel follow-through (SBFT)– Enteroclysis

• CTE

• MRE

Fluoroscopic exams

• Real time imaging• Enteroclysis

– Double contrast = “gold standard” imaging– Limited availability– Very uncomfortable

• SBFT – Single contrast = limited mucosal detail– Operator dependent, greater interobserver

variation

Fluoroscopy is a dying art

CTE

• Advantages– Scan time < 1 min– Greater spatial resolution– Less expensive than MRI

• Disadvantages– Exposure to ionizing radiation

• Pediatric patients• Multiple exams

– Contrast induced nephrotoxicity (CIN)

MRE

• Advantages– No ionizing radiation– Greater contrast resolution

• Disadvantages– Exam time 30 minutes– Requires greater pt compliance– Requires anti-peristaltic agent– More expensive than CT– Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF)

Image quality

• CT greater spatial resolution

• MR greater contrast resolution– Greater signal-to-noise ratio (SNR)– Fat suppression sequences– Subtraction imaging

• MR may be more sensitive– Fistulizing disease– Inflammatory vs fibrotic strictures

Reference: Al-Hawary M, et al. MRE: Why, When and How. SGR Abdominal Radiology Course 2010

CTE vs MRE vs SBFT

• Lee et al (2009) - 30 consecutive pts• CTE + MRE + SBFT • Ileocolonoscopy reference standard• Active small bowel CD

– Accuracy: CT 87%, MR 87%, SBFT 76%– Kappa: CT 0.8, MR 0.7, SBFT 0.5

• Extraenteric complications (fistula, sinus tract, abscess)– Sensitivity: CT & MR 100%, SBFT 35%

Lee SS, et al. Crohn Disease of the Small Bowel: Comparison of CT Enterography, MR Enterography, and Small-Bowel Follow-Through as Diagnostic Techniques. Radiology 2009; 251: 751-761.

CTE vs MRE

• Siddiki et al (2008) - 30 consecutive pts

• CTE + MRE

• Ileocolonoscopy reference standard

• Active small bowel CD– Sensitivity: CT 95%, MR 91%– Specificity: CT 89%, MR 67%– Kappa: CT 0.76, MR 0.63

• Image quality scores higher with CTSiddiki HA, et al. Prospective Comparison of State-of-the-Art MR Enterography and CT Enterography in Small-Bowel Crohn’s Disease. AJR 2008; 193:113–121.

Why choose MR over CT?

Radiation exposure

• Effective dose, millisievert (mSv)

• Whole body doses– Background: 3 mSv– Upper GI: 6 mSv– CT A/P: 15 mSv

• Approximate additional risk of fatal cancer for an adult from a single x-ray or CT is 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 1000

References: www.fda.gov and www.radiologyinfo.org (ACR and RSNA)

http://www.fda.gov/

http://www.radiologyinfo.org/

Radiation risk in pediatrics

• Children are considerably more sensitive to radiation than adults

• Larger window of opportunity for expressing radiation damage over a lifetime

• In the non-emergent setting, MRE should be considered over CTE for pediatric patients or young adults

Other patients to consider…

• If a non-IV contrast is necessary– Stage IV CKD (GFR < 30) – Pregnant patient

• MRE preferred over CTE– Provides increased SNR– Avoids ionizing radiation

Potential risk of MR?

Nephrogenic Sytemic Fibrosis

• NSF a potential complication of gadolinium (MRI) based IV contrast in pts with renal dysfunction

• Multisystem fibrosis, mainly skin• Relative risk of NSF (MR) << CIN (CT)

– MR contrast: Only a handful of cases reported in pts w/stage III CKD

– CT contrast: is the 3rd most common cause of hospital-acquired renal failure

• MR contrast is the lesser of the 2 evils

Reference: ACR Manual on Contrast Media – Version 7, 2010

MRE technique

Oral and IV contrast

• CTE and MRE use the same enteric contrast prep to distend the small bowel – VoLumen (2% sorbitol)– Locust bean gum + mannitol– Water is suboptimal

• CTE and MRE require IV contrast – Peak enhancement mucosa @ 40 sec– Progressive bowel wall p 60 sec

Oral contrast agent

• Adequate small bowel distension is crucial • We use 1350 mL of VoLumen (E-Z-EM)

– Sipped continuously over 45-60 minutes– Frequent monitoring of patient– Begin scanning 60 min from start of oral

contrast

• Pts informed about side effects, including abdominal spasms and diarrhea (2% sorbitol)

Suboptimal small bowel distension

Adedquate small bowel distension

Spasmolytic agents

• Glucagon 1 mg IM – preferred– or

• Hyocyamine (Levsin) 0.25 mg SL

• Administered immediately prior to scanning

• T1 post-contrast sequences are most susceptible to image degradation

From: Fidler JL. MRE Protocol Optimization. SGR Abdominal Radiology Course 2010

Without glucagon With glucagon

MRI sequences

• Pre-contrast sequences– Ultrafast T2 – Steady state free precession – With and w/o fat supression

• Post IV contrast sequences– Coronal T1 (0, 40, 60, 80 sec)– Axial T1 (100 sec)

• Total scan time < 30 minutes

Coronal T2

w/o fat suppression w/fat suppression

Axial T2


Coronal FIESTA


Axial FIESTA

Coronal T1

0 sec

Coronal T1

40 sec post contrast

Coronal T1


40 sec 60 sec 80 sec

Coronal T1 post-contrast

~ 100 sec

Axial T1 post contrast

Steady state free precession MRI

• Also known as – FIESTA (GE)– True FISP (Siemens)– Balanced FFE (Philips)

• Signal is determined by ratio of T2/T1

• High resolution, high SNR– Exquisite evaluation of mesenteric

vasculature and lymph nodes

Bhosale P, et al. Utility of the FIESTA Pulse Sequence in Body Oncologic Imaging. AJR 2009;192:S83–S93.

Coronal FIESTA


Initial experience at NSMC

Initial experience at NSMC

• 17 patients– 5 known CD - 4 positive, 1 negative– 8 suspected CD - all negative– 4 anemia - all negative

• 5 pts w/CD– 3 pts - distal ileal inflammation– 2 pts - skip segments– 1 pt - ? jejunal inflammation

• 1 CD pt scanned at PMA– Fibrotic stricture of TI

Case 1

33 yo with abdominal pain and diarrhea, negative prior CT

Normal exam

T2 MRICT (H20)

Normal exam

FIESTA MRICT (H20)

Normal exam

CT (H20) T1+C MRI

Case 2

48 yo w/CD, on Entocort, CT 2 mo earlier showing partial SBO w/inflammatory stricture

CT T1+C MRIT2 MRI

Distal ileum inflammation

CT T1+C MRIT2 MRI

Skip segment in distal ileum

Case 3

67 yo newly dx’d CD, asymptomatic

TI inflammation at prior colonoscopy

T2 T1+C

TI inflammation

T2 T1+C

Skip segment in pelvis

Case 4

19 yo w/ CD on Pentasa and 6-MP,

Decreased appetite,

Strictured cecum on colonoscopy

Thickened cecum and TI

T2 T1+C

Thickened appendix

T2 T1+C

“comb sign” and adenopathy

FIESTA FIESTA w/FS

Chronic / treated RLQ inflammation

T2 T1+CFIESTA

Prior SBFT in 2006

Case 5

38 yo w/CD on 6-MP,Wt loss, fatigue, abd pain,

Gastric bypass 2008,Negative EGD up to G-J

T2 T1+CFIESTA

Wall thickening at J-J anastomosis

f/u CT Prior MRI

CT 3 wks later…

Transient enteritis vs intussusception?

NSMC case

Transient intussusception?

From: Leyendecker JR, et al. MR Enterography in the Management of Patients with Crohn Disease. RadioGraphics 2009; 29:1827–1846

Case 6 - PMA

39 yo w/CD, on Humira

Bloating, distension, RLQ pain,

Strictured ICV at colonoscopy

Mild thickening/narrowing of TI

T2

No enhancement

T1 + C

Inflammatory vs fibrotic stricture

From: Al-Hawary M, et al. MRE: Why, When and How. SGR Abdominal Radiology Course 2010

Follow up colonoscopy

• Mild narrowing and inflammation of ICV

• Scope passed through ICV

Extraenteric complications

Enteroenteric fistula


Ileocolic fistula


Enterovesical fistula


Abscess

From: Al-Hawary M, et al. MRE: Why, When and How. SGR Abdominal Radiology Course 2010

In the acute setting… CT with IV and positive oral contrast should be obtained

Other possible indicationsfor MRE?

• Small bowel tumors

• Large bowel pathology

CT or fluoroscopy is preferred

Summary

• MRE is an established technique with nearly equivalent accuracy to CTE

• The principle benefit of MRE is the ability to safely image patients without the use of ionizing radiation

• This is particularly relevant in young patients that will potentially undergo multiple imaging evaluations

Conclusions

• MR is the study of choice– Pts with established CD– Young/pediatric pts– Pts with stage III, IV CKD– Pregnant pts

• CT is the study of choice– Older pts with suspected CD– Large or claustrophobic pts – Suspected colitis or small bowel tumor

Thank you• Al-Hawary M, et al. MRE: Why, When and How. SGR Abdominal Radiology Course

2010.• Lee SS, et al. Crohn Disease of the Small Bowel: Comparison of CT Enterography,

MR Enterography, and Small-Bowel Follow-Through as Diagnostic Techniques. Radiology 2009; 251: 751-761.

• Siddiki HA, et al. Prospective Comparison of State-of-the-Art MR Enterography and CT Enterography in Small-Bowel Crohn’s Disease. AJR 2008; 193:113–121.

• www.fda.gov• www.radiologyinfo.org• ACR Manual on Contrast Media – Version 7, 2010.• Fidler JL. MRE Protocol Optimization. SGR Abdominal Radiology Course 2010.• Bhosale P, et al. Utility of the FIESTA Pulse Sequence in Body Oncologic Imaging.

AJR 2009;192:S83–S93.• Leyendecker JR, et al. MR Enterography in the Management of Patients with Crohn

Disease. RadioGraphics 2009; 29:1827–1846.

Update on MR Enterography PMA GI Conference January 4, 2011 Alvin Yamamoto, MD Commonwealth...

Documents

Transcript of Update on MR Enterography PMA GI Conference January 4, 2011 Alvin Yamamoto, MD Commonwealth...