Associations between quantitative evaluation of bowel wall microvascular flow by contrast‐enhanced ultrasound and indices of disease activity in Crohn's disease patients using both bolus and infusion techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim is to investigate whether baseline contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) correlates with indices of activity in Crohn's disease (CD) and can predict response to medical treatment. METHODS: In this prospective study, symptomatic CD patients underwent baseline CEUS performed with Definity using both bolus and infusion methods. Time-intensity curves (TIC), peak intensity (PI), and area under curve (AUC) from a region of interest over the diseased bowel were calculated for both bolus and infusion acquisitions. We used Mann-Whitney U test for continuous and chi-square/two-tailed Fisher's exact test for categorical variable comparison and Spearman's correlation coefficient to correlate clinical score and CEUS kinetic parameters. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients (9 men, 12 women, median age 32 years) were accrued. Fifteen patients had clinically active disease defined as Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) score ≥5. Median values of baseline CEUS parameters PI (bolus: 26 vs 8.86; P = .023 and perfusion: 7.6 vs 3.2; P = .009) and AUC (bolus: 769 vs 248.8; P = .036 and perfusion: 188.9 vs 73.9; P = .012) differed significantly in patients with active vs inactive disease. Nine patients with active disease underwent escalated or new treatment. Five were nonresponders. Responders had higher median values of baseline parameters (PI, bolus: 35 vs 18.8; P = .556, and perfusion: 7.6 vs 3.9; P = 190), (AUC, bolus: 1473.9 vs 314; P = .111, and perfusion: 154.7 vs 74.4, P = .286). CONCLUSIONS: CEUS kinetic parameters correlate with clinical and laboratory indices and are significantly higher in patients with active disease. The responders had higher CEUS kinetic parameters than nonresponders that did not reach statistical significance in our small cohort.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".