Endoscopic Skipping, Stricturing, and Penetrating Complications in Crohn’s Disease on Tandem Ileo-colonoscopy and Cross-sectional Imaging: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Crohn's disease (CD) is characterized by discontinuous inflammation. Failure to identify skipping lesions of the terminal ileum (TI) or transmural changes can lead to incorrect management. METHODS: Eligible adult patients with CD undergoing ileo-colonoscopy and computed tomography enterography or magnetic resonance enterography within 6 months. We determined the prevalence of endoscopic skipping (normal ileum on colonoscopy but proximal small bowel inflammation on cross-sectional imaging), skip lesions (discontinuous inflammation along the gastrointestinal tract identified on cross-sectional imaging), structuring, and penetrating complications. RESULTS: Among 202 patients, 45 (22.3%) had endoscopic skipping proximal to TI intubation. Fifty patients (24.5%) had small bowel skip lesions, primarily in the ileum. Strictures were identified in 34 patients (16.8%) through both imaging and ileo-colonoscopy, in 21 patients (10.4%) solely through cross-sectional imaging, and in 3 patients (1.5%) solely through ileo-colonoscopy. Approximately 36.2% of stricturing cases would be missed without cross-sectional imaging. Penetrating complications, including abscesses (2.5%) and various fistula types (4.9%), were detected in 15 (7.4%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Ileo-colonoscopy missed detection of active CD in approximately one-fifth of cases due to more proximal disease location. Stricturing disease might be missed in more than a third of cases if cross-sectional imaging is not performed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".