<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Endoscopy remains the exam of choice in the evaluation of activity in Crohn’s disease (CD) after surgery (ACD-AS). However, intestinal ultrasound (IUS) may represent a noninvasive alternative. The objective of this study is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of this modality compared to endoscopy. <b><i>Material and Methods:</i></b> This is a cross-sectional study, comprising a period of 14 months, carried out in patients with established CD and ileocecal resection due to the disease. IUS (HI-VISION Avius®, Tokyo, Japan) was performed with linear probe B-mode/Doppler prior to ileocolonoscopy. IUS and ileocolonoscopy were performed on the same day by 2 specialists in Gastroenterology dedicated to ultrasound and inflammatory bowel disease, in a double-blind mode. Collected demographic and clinical data (Harvey-Bradshaw Index [HBI]; remission ≤4), serological/fecal inflammatory parameters (leukocytes [4–10 × 10⁹ cells/L], C-reactive protein [≤0.5 mg/dL], and fecal calprotectin [&#x3c;50 mg/kg]), endoscopy (Rutgeerts score: remission &#x3c;i2), and ultrasound (intestinal wall thickening [≤3 mm] and digestive wall vascularization using the semiquantitative score of Limberg [absent = 0, sparse = 1, moderate = 2, and marked = 3]). <b><i>Results:</i></b> Thirty-nine patients (female: 64.1%, mean age: 43.5 ± 15.3 years) were included. The median post-surgery follow-up was 9 years (IQR 3–12). The Montreal classification was as follows: L1, 61.5% (<i>n</i> = 24); L3, 38.5% (<i>n</i> = 15); B1 and B2, 28.2% (<i>n</i> = 11); and B3, 43.6% (<i>n</i> = 17). Most patients were in clinical remission (87.2%; <i>n</i> = 34), with a mean HBI of 2.1 ± 2.2. Twenty-two patients (56.4%) had normal inflammatory markers. IUS (intestinal wall thickening &#x3e;3 mm and/or Limberg score &#x3e;1) was abnormal in 61.5% (<i>n</i> = 24) of the cases. Endoscopic remission (Rutgeerts score &#x3c;i2) in 53.8% (<i>n</i> = 21) of the cases. Compared to endoscopy, IUS (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] = 0.75, <i>p</i> = 0.007) showed a diagnostic accuracy superior to that of inflammatory parameters (AUROC = 0.66, <i>p</i> = 0.083) and clinical parameters (AUROC = 0.64, <i>p</i> = 0.139). IUS showed a moderate concordance with endoscopy (κ = 0.5, <i>p</i> = 0.001), which was higher than that with inflammatory parameters (ĸ = 0.33, <i>p</i> = 0.041) or clinical parameters (ĸ = 0.29, <i>p</i> = 0.01). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Ultrasound evaluation of the digestive wall is a noninvasive technique that shows a good diagnostic accuracy and a moderate concordance with endoscopy, being superior to clinical and serological/fecal inflammatory parameters.

Images in…Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

An 80-year-old man presented with a bleeding epigastric mass in the emergency department (a). He had known chronic liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma. He had undergone thermoablation in 2016 and 2018 of a segment III liver nodule and transarterial chemoembolization 15 months before. After transarterial chemoembolization, a liver abscess was suspected, and a transcutaneous biopsy was performed (b), showing an extensively necrosed hepatocellular carcinoma. He was lost to follow-up because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Fourteen months later, he presented with a painful epigastric nodule that had slowly grown. A computerized tomography scan showed anterior abdominal wall involvement of the hepatocellular carcinoma by growth into adjacent structures and probable seeding through the previous biopsy tract (c). A multidisciplinary team proposed sorafenib therapy that the patient is currently undergoing. (Informed consent was obtained from the patient to publish these images.

No abstract

No abstract