ArticleCureus2025
Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Enterography and Computed Tomography Enterography in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Prospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Abbreviated non-contrast magnetic resonance enterography for Crohn's disease: a reliability study.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
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
backgroundInflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), comprising Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are chronic relapsing inflammatory disorders requiring accurate diagnosis and periodic monitoring. Cross-sectional imaging modalities such as magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) and computed tomography enterography (CTE) have become pivotal in evaluating bowel wall and extraintestinal involvement. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic efficacy and feature agreement between MRE and CTE in assessing key mural and extramural characteristics of IBD.
methodsA comparative cross-sectional study was conducted on patients diagnosed with IBD who underwent both MRE and CTE. Imaging findings were independently reviewed to assess diagnostic agreement on parameters including mural thickening, mural stratification, skip lesions, luminal stenosis, and creeping fat sign. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square tests (χ²) and independent t-tests to evaluate agreement, discrepancies, and demographic correlations.
resultsThe mean age of participants was 43.40 ± 13.38 years (range: 20-63 years), with 19 (54.3%) patients diagnosed with CD and 16 (45.7%) with UC. No significant difference was observed in age between agreement and discrepancy groups (t = -0.05, p = 0.9611). Overall, MRE showed higher agreement with clinical diagnosis for mural stratification (p<0.05) and creeping fat (p<0.01) than CTE. Feature-wise comparison revealed agreement rates of 68.97% for mural thickening (χ² = 0.18, p = 0.6756), 74.19% for mural stratification (χ² = 0.0, p = 1.0), 66.67% for skip lesions (χ² = 0.0, p = 0.9901), 63.64% for luminal stenosis (χ² = 0.19, p = 0.6589), and 66.67% for creeping fat (χ² = 0.27, p = 0.6044).
conclusionMRE and CTE demonstrated comparable diagnostic agreement in evaluating IBD features, with MRE offering superior tissue characterization and radiation-free imaging, while CTE provided faster acquisition and higher spatial resolution. Despite moderate agreement levels, both modalities remain complementary in clinical practice. MRE should be preferred for longitudinal follow-up, particularly in younger patients, given its safety profile and diagnostic comprehensiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.