Software-assisted quantitative analysis of small bowel motility compared to manual measurements

• Published in: Clinical radiology Vol. 69; no. 4; pp. 363 - 371
• Main Authors: Bickelhaupt, S, Froehlich, J.M, Cattin, R, Raible, S, Bouquet, H, Bill, U, Patak, M.A
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Elsevier Ltd 01-04-2014
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Female; Gastrointestinal Motility; Humans; Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; Intestine, Small - physiopathology; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Male; Middle Aged; Observer Variation; Radiology; Reproducibility of Results; Retrospective Studies; Sensitivity and Specificity; Software; Switzerland - epidemiology; Switzerland
• ISSN: 0009-9260; 1365-229X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2013.11.004

Aim To validate a newly developed software prototype that automatically analyses small bowel motility by comparing it directly with manual measurement. Material and methods Forty-five patients with clinical indication for small bowel magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were retrospectively included in this institutional review board-approved study. MRI was performed using a 1.5 T system following a standard MR-enterography protocol. Small bowel motility parameters (contractions-per-minute, luminal diameter, amplitude) were measured three times each in identical segments using the manual and the semiautomatic software-assisted method. The methods were compared for agreement, repeatability, and time needed for each measurement. All parameters were compared between the methods. Results A total of 91 small-bowel segments were analysed. No significant intra-individual difference ( p >  0.05) was found for peristaltic frequencies between the methods (mean: 4.14/min manual; 4.22/min software-assisted). Amplitudes (5.14 mm; 5.57 mm) and mean lumen diameters (17.39 mm; 14.68) differed due to systematic differences in the definition of the bowel wall. Mean duration of single measurement was significantly ( p <  0.01) shorter with the software (6.25 min; 1.30 min). The scattering of repeated measurements was significantly ( p <  0.05) lower using the software. Conclusion The software-assisted method accomplished highly reliable, fast and accurate measurement of small bowel motility. Measurement precision and duration differed significantly between the two methods in favour of the software-assisted technique.