Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared With Ileocolonoscopy in Evaluating Disease Severity in Crohn’s Disease  Jasper Florie, Karin Horsthuis, Daniel W. Hommes, C. Yung Nio, Johannes B. Reitsma, Sander J. van Deventer, Jaap Stoker  Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology  Volume 3, Issue 12, Pages 1221-1228 (December 2005) DOI: 10.1016/S1542-3565(05)00853-0 Copyright © 2005 American Gastroenterological Association Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Distribution of CDEIS scores within and across different categories of disease severity based on MRI (MRIend based). Radiologist 1 (left) and radiologist 2 (right) compared to the CDEIS determined by the endoscopist. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2005 3, 1221-1228DOI: (10.1016/S1542-3565(05)00853-0) Copyright © 2005 American Gastroenterological Association Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 A 41-year-old female patient with CD of the neoterminal ileum. (A) Axial post-contrast T1-weighted MRI showed wall thickening, stenosis, and increased enhancement. (B) Neoterminal ileum at endoscopy showed ulceration and stenosis. (C) Conventional barium enteroclysis showed cobblestoning and stenosis. (D) Resected neoterminal ileum showed thickened bowel wall with cobblestoning. C, cecum; I, neoterminal ileum. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2005 3, 1221-1228DOI: (10.1016/S1542-3565(05)00853-0) Copyright © 2005 American Gastroenterological Association Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Patient ratings on the burden of bowel preparation (left side) and pain during the examination itself (right side). IS, ileocolonoscopy. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2005 3, 1221-1228DOI: (10.1016/S1542-3565(05)00853-0) Copyright © 2005 American Gastroenterological Association Terms and Conditions