Role of intestinal ultrasound in ulcerative colitis: A systematic review

Table 9 Summary of studies comparing intestinal ultrasound and magnetic resonance enterography

Ref.	Study type	Number of patients	Follow-up duration	Comparator	IUS parameters	Gold standard	Results
Kamel et al[56]	Prospective	40 (14 UC, 26 CD)	Cross-sectional	Bowel ultrasound and MRE	BWT, CDS, mesenteric fat and lymph nodes, complications	MRE and colonoscopy	Accuracy of IUS (in IBD): 85% ileum, 70% large bowel, 100% correlation with MRI/colonoscopy with respect to active disease (in IBD) (no separate analysis for UC)
Ziech et al[8]	Prospective	28 suspected IBD pediatric	Cross-sectional	MR colonography	BWT, CDS, BWS, i-fat, haustrations, lymph nodes, motility	MR colonography	Sensitivity IUS: 55%; MR colonography: 57%; Specificity IUS: 100%; MR colonography: 75%; cannot effectively differentiate UC and CD unless terminal ileum is involved
Barber et al[71]	Retrospective	53 children	Cross-sectional	MRE	Scoring based on METRIC trial	Combined consensus score based imaging and clinical scores	Clinical correlation of IUS score (0.657) > MRE score (0.598). Agreement for IUS scoring: Lin coefficient 0.95 > MRE 0.60

CD: Crohn’s disease; UC: Ulcerative colitis; MRE: Magnetic resonance enterography; CTE: Computed tomography enterography; TI: Terminal ileum; BWT: Bowel wall thickness; BWS: Bowel wall stratification; AUC: Area under the curve; IBUS-SAS: International bowel ultrasound segmental activity score; HR-US: High resolution ultrasound.