Intestinal ultrasound [IUS] is an accurate, patient-centreed monitoring tool that objectively evaluates Crohn’s disease [CD] activity. However no current, widely accepted, reproducible activity index exists to facilitate consistent IUS identification of inflammatory activity. The aim of this study is to identify key parameters of CD inflammation on IUS, evaluate their reliability, and develop an IUS index reflecting segmental activity. There were three phases: [1] expert consensus Delphi method to derive measures of IUS activity; [2] an initial, multi-expert case acquisition and expert interpretation of 20 blinded cases, to measure inter-rater reliability for individual measures; [3] refinement of case acquisition and interpretation by 12 international experts, with 30 blinded case reads with reliability assessment and development of a segmental activity score. Delphi consensus: 11 experts representing seven countries identified four key parameters including: [1] bowel wall thickness [BWT]; [2] bowel wall stratification; [3] hyperaemia of the wall [colour Doppler imaging]; and [4] inflammatory mesenteric fat. Blind read: each variable exhibited moderate to substantial reliability. Optimal, standardised image and cineloop acquisition were established. Second blind read and score development: intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC] for BWT was almost perfect at 0.96 [0.94–0.98]. All four parameters correlated with the global disease activity assessment and were included in the final International Bowel Ultrasound Segmental Activity Score with almost perfect ICC (0.97 [0.95–0.99, p <0.001]). Using expert consensus and standardised approaches, identification of key activity measurements on IUS has been achieved and a segmental activity score has been proposed, demonstrating excellent reliability.

No consensus exists on defining intestinal ultrasound response, transmural healing, or transmural remission in inflammatory bowel disease, nor clear guidance for optimal timing of assessment during treatment. This systematic review and expert consensus study aimed to define such recommendations, along with key parameters included in response reporting. Electronic databases were searched from inception to July 26, 2021, using pre-defined terms. Studies were eligible if at least two intestinal ultrasound [IUS] assessments at different time points during treatment were reported, along with an appropriate reference standard. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to examine study-level risk of bias. An international panel of experts [n = 18] rated an initial 196 statements [RAND/UCLA process, scale 1–9]. Two videoconferences were conducted, resulting in additional ratings of 149 and 13 statements, respectively. Out of 5826 records, 31 full-text articles, 16 abstracts, and one research letter were included; 83% [40/48] of included studies showed a low concern of applicability, and 96% [46/48] had a high risk of bias. A consensus was reached on 41 statements, with clear definitions of IUS treatment response, transmural healing, transmural remission, timing of assessment, and general considerations when using intestinal ultrasound in inflammatory bowel disease. Response criteria and time points of response assessment varied between studies, complicating direct comparison of parameter changes and their relation to treatment outcomes. To ensure a unified approach in routine care and clinical trials, we provide recommendations and definitions for key parameters for intestinal ultrasound response, to incorporate into future prospective studies.

The current consensus guideline offers a comprehensive and practical guidance on the diagnostic and monitoring of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). It provides recommendations on requirements for initial diagnosis, detection of complications, the use of monitoring tools in patients with IBD and diagnostics in specific situations, such as pregnancy, postoperatively and for cancer surveillance. The guideline is a joint project of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization (ECCO), the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology, the European Society of Pathology, and the International Bowel Ultrasonography Group under the leadership of ECCO.

Background and Aims: The diagnosis and follow up of patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] requires cross-sectional imaging modalities, such as intestinal ultrasound [IUS], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] and computed tomography [CT]. The quality and homogeneity of medical reporting are crucial to ensure effective communication between specialists and to improve patient care. The current topical review addresses optimized reporting requirements for cross-sectional imaging in IBD.Methods: An expert consensus panel consisting of gastroenterologists, radiologists and surgeons convened by the ECCO in collaboration with ESGAR performed a systematic literature review covering the reporting aspects of MRI, CT, IUS, endoanal ultrasonography and transperineal ultrasonography in IBD. Practice position statements were developed utilizing a Delphi methodology incorporating two consecutive rounds. Current practice positions were set when ≥80% of the participants agreed on a recommendation.Results: Twenty-five practice positions were developed, establishing standard terminology for optimal reporting in cross-sectional imaging. Assessment of inflammation, complications and imaging of perianal CD are outlined. The minimum requirements of a standardized report, including a list of essential reporting items, have been defined.Conclusions: This topical review offers practice recommendations to optimize and homogenize reporting in cross-sectional imaging in IBD.

Increased small intestinal wall thickness correlates with both inflammatory activity and fibrosis in Crohn’s disease [CD]. Assessment of perfusion holds promise as an objective marker distinguishing between the two conditions. Our primary aim was to determine if relative bowel wall perfusion measurements correlate with histopathological scores for inflammation or fibrosis in CD. A total of 25 patients were investigated before elective surgery for small intestinal CD. Unenhanced ultrasonography [US] and magnetic resonance enterography [MRE] were applied to describe bowel wall thickness. Perfusion was assessed with contrast-enhanced US [CEUS] and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRE [DCE-MRE]. Histopathology was used as gold standard. Compared with histopathology, the mean wall thickness was 0.4 mm greater on US [range -0.3 to 1.0, p = 0.24] and 1.4 mm greater on MR [0.4 to 2.3, p = 0.006]. No correlation was found between the severity of inflammation or fibrosis on histopathology, and either DCE-MRE [r = -0.13, p = 0.54 for inflammation and r = 0.41, p = 0.05 for fibrosis] or CEUS [r = 0.16, p = 0.45 for inflammation and r = -0.28, p = 0.19 for fibrosis]. Wall thickness assessed with US was correlated with both histological inflammation [r = 0.611, p = 0.0012] and fibrosis [r = 0.399, p = 0.048]. The same was not true for MR [r = 0.41, p = 0.047 for inflammation and r = 0.29, p = 0.16 for fibrosis] Bowel wall thickness assessed with US is a valid marker of inflammation in small intestinal CD. However, relative contrast enhancement of US or of MRE cannot distinguish between inflammatory activity and fibrosis.

Background: Intestinal ultrasound [IUS] is a promising and non-invasive cross-sectional imaging modality in the diagnosis and monitoring of ulcerative colitis [UC]. Unlike endoscopy, where standardized scoring for evaluation of disease activity is widely used, scoring for UC with IUS is currently unavailable. Therefore, we conducted a study to assess the reliability of IUS in UC among expert sonographists in order to identify robust parameters. Methods: Thirty patients with both clinically active [25] and quiescent [five] UC were included. Six expert sonographers first agreed upon key IUS parameters and grading, including bowel wall thickness [BWT], colour Doppler signal [CDS], inflammatory fat [i-fat], loss of bowel wall stratification [BWS], loss of haustrations and presence of lymph nodes. Thirty video-recorded cases were blindly reviewed. Results: Inter-observer agreement was almost perfect for BWT (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC]: 0.96) and substantial for CDS [κ = 0.63]. Agreement was moderate for presence of lymph nodes [κ = 0.41] and fair for presence of i-fat [κ = 0.36], BWS [κ = 0.24] and loss of haustrations [κ = 0.26]. Furthermore, there was substantial agreement for presence of disease activity on IUS [κ = 0.77] and almost perfect agreement for disease severity [ICC: 0.93]. Most individual parameters showed a strong association with IUS disease activity as measured by the six readers. Conclusion: IUS is a reliable imaging modality to assess disease activity and severity in UC. Important individual parameters such as BWT and CDS are reliable and could be incorporated in a future UC scoring index. Standardized acquisition and assessment of UC utilizing IUS with established reliability is important to expand the use of IUS globally.