Skip to main content
. 2018 Jan 2;12(6):718–729. doi: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjx186

Table 2.

Imaging parameters stratified by histopathological inflammation grade [in 35 patients with CD and 40 ileal segments analysed].

Parameter Grade 1 [n*** = 15] Grade 2/3 [n*** = 25] p
Length of involved bowel 5.93 ± 3.99 9.32 ± 5.79 0.035
Pattern of enhancement at 25 s* 0.01
• Homogeneous 10 [67%] 4 [20%]
• Layered/mucosal only 5 [33%] 16 [80%]
Pattern of enhancement at 60 s 0.05
• Homogeneous 11 [73%] 10 [40%]
• Layered/mucosal only 4 [27%] 15 [60%]
Pattern of enhancement at 180 s** 1
• Homogeneous 11 [79%] 19 [79%]
• Layered/mucosal only 3 [21%] 5 [21%]
Degree of enhancement at 60 s 0.024
• Mild-moderate enhancement 7 [47%] 3 [12%]
• Marked enhancement 8 [53%] 22 [88%]
Ulceration 6 [40%] 18 [72%] 0.09
Fistula 5 [33%] 16 [64%] 0.1
Abscess 3 [20%] 9 [36%] 0.47
Comb sign 2 [13%] 7 [32%] 0.44
Upstream dilation 10 [40%] 15 [60%] 0.749
Enhancement ratio at 25 s* 162.1 ± 98.4 184.9 ± 71.9 0.4
Enhancement ratio at 60 s 176.4 ± 67.1 200.4 ± 63.5 0.222
Enhancement ratio at 180 s** 173.2 ± 61.2 188.9 ± 55.1 0.455
ADC* 1.28 ± 0.27 1.07 ± 0.14 0.028
Wall thickness on T1W post-contrast 6.86 ± 2.65 9.22 ± 3.63 0.018
Wall thickness on T2WI 6.79 ± 2.22 7.79 ± 2.03 0.148
MaRIa score 23.3 ± 8.0 31.0 ± 13.5 0.013
Clermont score 28.5 ± 7.2 33.2 ± 8.2 0.115

Significant p-values are bolded. Quantitative data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Qualitative data are presented as number of cases [percentage of cases].

*Not available in five patients.

**Not available in two patients.

***Number of bowel segments.