MRE vs Scope results??

[AZMOM]

Have any of you had experience with an MRE and colonscopy performed closely together? Were the results consistent?

Claire's MRE showed nothing. But she's had the WORST weekend she's had in a long time. My parents are concerned. We're concerned. She's complaining almost CONSTANTLY and it's wearing me out.

The scope is 4/19 but I find myself questioning if we should proceed. If her bloodwork is ok (it's never stellar) and the MRE is normal, is this as good as it gets? Could we all be crazy? (Don't answer that one! :ybatty

My rational brain knows that with all that bleeding Friday that it warrants investigation but I feel like maybe, just maybe, the doc thinks I'm an alarmist. I love him dearly but I think he thinks I'm hyper-vigilant. Hell, I am hypervigilant. I'm the one with the kid that lands in the hospital for weeks.....not him.

Okay so to my original question - thoughts on MRE vs scope?

J.

 

[my little penguin]

For DS mre was normal but scope still showed inflammation in his TI as well as new inflammation in his rectum and sigmoid colon.

 

[DustyKat]

Hey J,

I would still go with the scope because each test has its own separate purpose and abilities regardless of whether or not they compliment each other.

In Matt's case he had the scope one day and a CTE the next as the GI did not want to push through the inflamed area of ileum to see how far it extended. The CTE showed that he had 100mm of affected bowel with a further 50mm of stranding. When he had his surgery 4 months later the numbers quoted in the pathology of the resected bowel matched exactly what the CTE had stated. So for us they did match up.

Also remember an MRE, although naturally visualising the entire bowel, really shines in the small bowel as that is where the oral contrast is designed to perform at its best.

Dusty. :heart:

 

[QueenGothel]

The biopsies they take during a scope are very beneficial in so I would do the scope as well especially since she had bleeding since. Rowan had both as well it was 4 months inbetween them the scope showed mild inflammation, whereas 4 months later the MRE showed complete pancolitis. But her case is not typical bc the meds caused it to worsen. But this was our proof that the meds were in fact not helping but hurting. So long as the GI thinks there is no danger involved (perforating the bowel). We did these in these test in a different order though as they wouldn't scope my DD bc of the fear of perforating the bowel. Her bleeding was severe.

 

[Tesscorm]

I agree with Dusty, Stephen's MRE and then scope confirmed and complemented each other. MRE had shown inflammation only in the small intestine, scopes confirmed all areas were clear except the inflammation that was present going into the TI area... scopes weren't able to see the small intestine but the MRE had shown the inflammation and some narrowing was there.

 

[DanceMom]

A had an MRE that showed possible thickening/inflammation in the small intestine. A few weeks later she had scopes that showed inflammation throughout the small intestine and colon. The scopes also showed SIBO which we did not know was an issue. So for us, the scopes gave much more info than the MRE.

 

[Bubbly]

Agree with above, son had scopes one day, and couldnt see everything due to severe inflammation, had the mri the following day which gave fab pictures of what was going on!

Both tests can show up different things, they generally give a very clear picture of what is going on.

Good luck and let us know how things go x

 

[CarolinAlaska]

For Jae, who wasn't in a bad flare, she had MRE one day and the following day the scopes. MRE was normal and scopes showed one small patch of inflammation in transverse colon. 9 days later she was flared up from the prep of the previous week's scopes and showed inflammation throughout her small and large intestines with ulcers throughout her colon. Go figure. This did get our diagnosis, however.

 

[Crohn's Mom]

Personally, I would go ahead with the scopes. As Dusty said, they both have their own purpose and the GI may just be able to see something that the MRE may have missed. Gab's first MRE (pre surgery) missed plenty. :yrolleyes:

Hope Clarie's having a better week than she did weekend ! :ghug:

 

[Dexky]

I know it's a lot to put a kid through J, but I swear I want EJ's annual scopes to continue. I want to know what's going on in there!! I know sometime in the future there'll be some way to continuously monitor these kids and it will be non-invasive but in the meantime, it seems scopes are the best we got except maybe pill cams.

 

[Jennifer]

Bleeding is not overreacting so I'd definitely would want the scope done as well (with biopsies taken, otherwise what's the point?). Basically the MRE didn't show what's going on so testing will have to continue to find the cause of the bleeding and other symptoms she may be having. Not to mention that every radiologist is different and will sometimes miss something or feel that something isn't much of a concern and wont get noted in the report.

 

[AZMOM]

You all just don't know how much I appreciate you.

J.

 

[Brian'sMom]

Over past 3 years our GI did 2 MRE's only...my husband pushed for a scope at last visit because our son just isn't growing as he should and now his labs were not good anymore. GI was going to add mtx without looking inside and maybe another MRE. It had been 3 years since last scope! Its a pain to do the prep, but scope day is fast and over. I was glad we pushed for it. In the future I'm with Mark...they should be done more often. I don't know why our GI didn't think so...she relies too much on lab work.

 

[my little penguin]

DS has had 2 scopes , 1 MRE, 2 CT scans, and a small bowel follow through in 2 years ( most of the testing was during the first year after dx.

We are coming up on one year from last scope - not sure how the GI handles it since we did so much testing last year