Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 675

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Magnetic resonance for assessment of disease activity and severity in ileocolonic Crohn’s disease

Open access
Rimola, J, Rodriguez, S, García-Bosch, O, Ordás, I, Ayala, E, Aceituno, M, Pellisé, M, Ayuso, C, Ricart, E, Donoso, L, Panés, J·2009·Gut

Abstract

Objective: Assessment of disease extension and activity is crucial to guide treatment in Crohn’s disease. The objective of the current cross-sectional study was to determine the accuracy of MR for this assessment. Design: 50 patients with clinically active (n = 35) or inactive (n = 15) Crohn’s disease underwent ileocolonoscopy (reference standard) and MR. T2-weighted and precontrast and postcontrast-enhanced T1-weighted sequences were acquired. Endoscopic activity was evaluated by CDEIS (Crohn’s Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity); in addition endoscopic lesions were classified as absent, mild (inflammation without ulcers) or severe (presence of ulceration). Results: The comparison of intestinal segments with absent, mild and severe inflammation demonstrated a progressive and significant (p<0.001) increase in the following MR parameters: wall thickness, postcontrast wall signal intensity, relative contrast enhancement, presence of oedema, ulcers, pseudopolyps and lymph node enlargement. Independent predictors for CDEIS in a segment were wall thickness (p = 0.007), relative contrast enhancement (p = 0.01), presence of oedema (p = 0.02) and presence of ulcers at MR (p = 0.003). There was a significant correlation (r = 0.82, p<0.001) between the CDEIS of the segment and the MR index calculated according to the logistic regression analysis coefficients. The MR index had a high accuracy for the detection of disease activity (area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve 0.891, sensitivity 0.81, specificity 0.89) and for the detection of ulcerative lesions (area under the ROC curve 0.978, sensitivity 0.95, specificity 0.91) in the colon and terminal ileum. Conclusion: The accuracy of MR for detecting disease activity and assessing severity brings about the possibility of using MR as an alternative to endoscopy in the evaluation of ileocolonic Crohn’s disease.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/gut.2008.167957

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 675

Metadata

Authors
Rimola, J., Rodriguez, S., García-Bosch, O., Ordás, I., Ayala, E., Aceituno, M., Pellisé, M., Ayuso, C., Ricart, E., Donoso, L., & Panés, J.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2009-01-09
Volume
58
Issue
8
Pages
1113-1120
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2129859455
Cited by
675
References
2
FWCI
19.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Magnetic resonance for assessment of disease activity and severity in ileocolonic Crohn’s disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.2008.167957
The paper
Rimola, J., Rodriguez, S., García-Bosch, O., Ordás, I., Ayala, E., Aceituno, M., Pellisé, M., Ayuso, C., Ricart, E., Donoso, L., & Panés, J. (2009). Magnetic resonance for assessment of disease activity and severity in ileocolonic Crohn’s disease. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2008.167957

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.