Abstract Background and Aims Serial measurements of luminal disease activity may facilitate inflammatory bowel disease management. Gastrointestinal ultrasound is an easily performed, non-invasive alternative to other assessment modes. However, its widespread use is limited by concerns regarding validity, reliability, and responsiveness. We systematically identified ultrasound scoring indices used to evaluate inflammatory bowel disease activity and examine their operating characteristics. Methods Electronic databases were searched from inception to June 14, 2019 using pre-defined terms. Studies that reported on gastrointestinal ultrasound index operating properties in an inflammatory bowel disease population were eligible for inclusion. Study characteristics, index components, and operating property (i.e., validity, reliability, responsiveness, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) data were extracted. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to examine study-level risk of bias. Results Of the 2610 studies identified, 26 studies reporting on 21 ultrasound indices were included. The most common index components included bowel wall thickness, colour Doppler imaging, and bowel wall stratification. The correlation between ultrasound indices and references standards ranged from r=0.62-0.95 and k=0.40-0.96. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values ranged from 39%-100%, 63%-100%, 73%-100%, 57%-100%, and 40%-100%, respectively. Reliability and responsiveness data were limited. Most (92%, 24/26) studies received at least one unclear or high risk of bias rating. Conclusions Several gastrointestinal ultrasound indices for use in inflammatory bowel disease have been developed. Future research should focus on fully validating existing or novel gastrointestinal ultrasound scoring instruments for assessment of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis.

No abstract

Background and Aims Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a lifelong disease requiring frequent assessment to guide treatment and prevent flares or progression. Multiple tools are available for clinicians to monitor disease activity; however, there are a paucity of data to inform which monitoring tools are most acceptable to patients. The review aims to describe the available evidence for patient preference, satisfaction, tolerance and/or acceptability of the available monitoring tools in adults with IBD. Methods Embase, Medline, Cochrane Central and Clinical Trials.gov were searched from January 1980 to April 2019 for all study types reporting on the perspectives of adults with confirmed IBD on monitoring tools, where two or more tools were compared. Outcome measures with summary and descriptive data were presented. Results In 10 studies evaluating 1846 participants, monitoring tools included venipuncture, stool collection, gastrointestinal ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, wireless capsule endoscopy, barium follow-through and endoscopy. Outcome domains were patient satisfaction, acceptability of monitoring tool and patient preference. Noninvasive investigations were preferable to endoscopy in nine studies. When assessed, gastrointestinal ultrasound was consistently associated with greater acceptability and satisfaction compared with endoscopy or other imaging modalities. Conclusions Adults with IBD preferred noninvasive investigations, in particular gastrointestinal ultrasound, as compared to endoscopy for monitoring disease activity. When assessing disease activity, patient perceptions should be considered in the selection of monitoring tools. Further research should address whether adpoting monitoring approaches considered more acceptable to patients results in greater satisfaction, adherence and ultimately more beneficial clinical outcomes.