Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St., Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Pediatr Radiol. 2019 Jun;49(7):889-896. doi: 10.1007/s00247-019-04378-5. Epub 2019 Mar 9.
Oral contrast preparation is fundamental to ensuring diagnostic examination quality for magnetic resonance enterography (MRE), yet little is known about the relative palatability and tolerability of various oral contrast agents in pediatric patients with known or suspected inflammatory bowel disease.
We prospectively compared three MRE oral preparations in pediatric patients with known or suspected Crohn disease with respect to patient-reported tolerability and radiologist-determined small-bowel distension and opacification.
Seventy-five pediatric patients (mean age 14.8 years, 55% female) with known or suspected Crohn disease referred for MRE were randomized to an oral preparation with a sugar alcohol-based flavored beverage (Breeza), polyethylene glycol preparation (MiraLAX), or low-concentration barium sulfate suspension (VoLumen). Patients were instructed to consume oral contrast agent (using a weight-based protocol) beginning 60 min prior to MRE imaging. Following MRE, patients completed a questionnaire regarding their oral preparation solution including: taste (1-5 scale), feeling of well-being (1-5 scale) and willingness to consume again (yes/no). Two radiologists reviewed all MRE exams and rated exams for global features (active disease, overall small-bowel distention [1-4 scale]) and features specific to individual small-bowel segments (extent of distention, maximal luminal diameter, opacification, and susceptibility artifact). Statistical methods included one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey honest difference and Fisher exact tests.
The overall rate of completion of the entire prescribed contrast volume was 53% (40/75), with a significantly higher rate of completion for MiraLAX than for VoLumen (70% vs. 30%, P=0.007). Crossover to a different preparation occurred in nine patients (12%) and was significantly more frequent when the initial preparation was VoLumen versus MiraLAX (29% vs. 0%, P=0.005). Mean subjective taste ratings for both MiraLAX (3.4, P<0.0001) and Breeza (2.8, P=0.006) were superior to those of VoLumen (1.9), which persisted in the subset of patients with MRE evidence of active Crohn disease. Patients who consumed MiraLAX were more likely to be willing to drink it again compared to those consuming VoLumen (82% vs. 46%, P=0.009). Overall small-bowel distention and bowel-segment-specific metrics (distention, maximal diameter, opacification and susceptibility) did not significantly differ among groups.
In pediatric patients with known or suspected Crohn disease, MiraLAX and Breeza were rated as more palatable than VoLumen, and all three preparations achieved a similar degree of small-bowel distension and opacification on MRE. Imaging centers performing MRE should stock multiple oral contrast preparations because a sizable proportion of children require more than one agent to ingest the requisite oral contrast volume.
口服对比剂是确保磁共振肠造影(MRE)诊断检查质量的基础,但对于已知或疑似炎症性肠病的儿科患者,各种口服对比剂的相对可接受性和耐受性知之甚少。
我们前瞻性比较了三种 MRE 口服制剂在已知或疑似克罗恩病患儿中的耐受性,以及放射科医生确定的小肠扩张和显影情况。
75 例(平均年龄 14.8 岁,55%为女性)已知或疑似克罗恩病的儿科患者接受 MRE 检查,随机分为口服含糖醇调味饮料(Breeza)、聚乙二醇制剂(MiraLAX)或低浓度硫酸钡混悬液(VoLumen)的口服制剂组。患者被指示在 MRE 成像前 60 分钟开始使用基于体重的方案服用口服对比剂。MRE 后,患者完成了一份关于他们的口服制剂溶液的问卷,包括:口味(1-5 分)、舒适度(1-5 分)和再次服用的意愿(是/否)。两名放射科医生对所有 MRE 检查进行了回顾,并对整体特征(活动期疾病、小肠总体扩张[1-4 分])和特定于单个小肠段的特征(扩张程度、最大腔径、显影和敏感性伪影)进行了评分。统计方法包括单因素方差分析(ANOVA),并采用 Tukey 诚实差异检验和 Fisher 确切概率检验。
整个规定对比剂体积的完成率为 53%(40/75),MiraLAX 的完成率明显高于 VoLumen(70%比 30%,P=0.007)。9 名患者(12%)进行了交叉换用不同的制剂,而初始制剂为 VoLumen 时交叉换用的频率明显更高(29%比 0%,P=0.005)。MiraLAX(3.4,P<0.0001)和 Breeza(2.8,P=0.006)的平均主观口味评分均优于 VoLumen(1.9),在 MRE 显示活动期克罗恩病的患者亚组中,这种情况仍然存在。与服用 VoLumen 的患者相比,服用 MiraLAX 的患者更愿意再次服用(82%比 46%,P=0.009)。总体小肠扩张和肠段特异性指标(扩张、最大直径、显影和敏感性)在各组之间无显著差异。
在已知或疑似克罗恩病的儿科患者中,MiraLAX 和 Breeza 的口感优于 VoLumen,所有三种制剂在 MRE 上均能达到相似程度的小肠扩张和显影。进行 MRE 的影像中心应储备多种口服对比剂,因为相当一部分儿童需要使用多种制剂才能摄入所需的口服对比剂体积。