Key words
hemolytic-uremic syndrome - conventional radiography - CT - Shiga toxin-producing
E. coli - O104:H4 - enterohemorrhagic colitis
Introduction
Escherichia coli is a widespread commensal of the mammalian gut and a versatile pathogen
[1]. Certain strains of enterohemorrhagic E. coli produce Shiga toxin which inhibits
protein synthesis within susceptible eukaryotic cells leading to colitis. Infected
patients characteristically have an afebrile illness that begins with abdominal cramps
and watery diarrhea, which progresses to bloody diarrhea with high morbidity and mortality
[1]
[2]. Shiga toxin-producing enterohemorrhagic E. coli (STEC) colitis may be complicated
by life-threatening hemolytic–uremic syndrome (HUS) characterized by the triad of
acute renal failure, hemolytic anemia, and thrombocytopenia [3]
[4]. During previous STEC outbreaks, O157:H7 serotype has been identified as the primary
cause of colitis-associated HUS, which occurs primarily in children and is a rare
event in adults [5]
[6].
From May to June 2011, 3842 cases of infection with an unusual strain of Shiga toxin-producing
E. coli, STEC O104:H4, were reported during a nationwide outbreak in Germany and sprouts
were finally identified as the most likely outbreak vehicle [7]
[8]. The outbreak was characterized by several unusual features: a high incidence in
adults (89 %), a greatly increased incidence of post-colitis HUS, a predominance of
female patients, and the rare serotype O104:H4. A total of 855 cases of HUS, including
36 (4.2 %) fatal cases, and 2987 additional cases of hemorrhagic STEC O104:H4 colitis
with 18 (0.6 %) fatal cases were reported. This marks one of the largest STEC outbreaks
ever described worldwide and indicates a high virulence of the new serotype O104:H4
[7]
[9].
Recognition of infection during the outbreak 2011 was initially hampered by the lack
of a specific laboratory approach [10]. Later on, the diagnosis was based on one-enzyme (XbaI) gel electrophoresis for
confirmation of the outbreak strain [7]. The genome of the German outbreak strain O104:H4 could be distinguished from other
strains because it contains a distinct set of additional virulence and antibiotic-resistance
factors [9]
[10]. In addition to the laboratory and clinical diagnosis of STEC infection, the assessment
of gastrointestinal complications including colitis, toxic megacolon and colonic perforation
are based on imaging. Early diagnosis and treatment are important to avoid fatal complications
and to prevent dissemination of the infection to distant sites [11].
Computed tomography (CT) is widely used to assess patients with nonspecific abdominal
pain or those suspected of having complications of colitis [12]
[13]
[14]. Therefore, radiologists must be familiar with E. coli colitis to assist in early
diagnosis [15]
[16]. Clinical and epidemical findings of the E. coli outbreak in Germany of the O104:H4
strain have been well described [7]
[9]
[17]
[18]
[19], but up to now there are no comprehensive reports of radiological findings of STEC
O104:H4 colitis. The purpose of this study was to determine abdominal CT and radiography
features of STEC O104:H4 colitis and to compare laboratory and clinical parameters
in a cohort of consecutive patients affected during the outbreak in Germany in 2011.
Materials and Methods
Patient population
The local institutional review board approved the retrospective study and waived the
requirement for written informed consent. Patients infected by STEC O104:H4 and presenting
with colitis or HUS were defined as outbreak cases [7]. 270 patients with STEC O104:H4 infection were treated at our university hospital
during the outbreak between May and June 2011. 23 of these patients (8.5 %; 7 men,
16 women; mean age of 48 ± 19 years, range 18 – 83 years) underwent abdominal imaging
and were included in this study. 12 patients received abdominal CT scanning and 11
patients received plain abdominal radiographs. The rationale for referral to radiological
imaging was clinical evidence of severe gastrointestinal complications in all 23 cases.
Clinical presentation and laboratory tests
Medical records of all 23 patients were reviewed for laboratory parameters, such as
hemoglobin, hematocrit, erythrocytes, leucocytes (WBC), platelets, urea, creatinine,
C-reactive protein, and lactate dehydrogenase. All tests were performed within 24
hours of radiological imaging. The presence of bloody diarrhea (three or more blood-containing
loose stools in a 24-h period) and the clinical diagnosis “acute abdomen” were recorded
as well as the duration of hospitalization.
Abdominal CT and radiography
Abdominal CT scans were performed with a 256-slice MDCT (Brilliance iCT, Philips Healthcare,
Best, The Netherlands) with the following parameters: gantry rotation time 330 ms,
collimation 128 × 0.625 mm, 0.758 pitch, tube voltage 120 kV, automated effective
tube current ranging from 40 – 200 eff. mAs. Raw data sets were reconstructed in a
soft tissue kernel (B30f) with a slice thickness of 5 mm. The scan range extended
from the top of the diaphragm to the bottom of the pelvis. CT images were obtained
within a single breath-hold in end-expiration and in a supine position. No patient
received oral contrast. 10 of the 12 patients (83.3 %) received 120 ml of nonionic
contrast material with an iodine concentration of 300 mg/ml (Imeron 300®, Bracco-Altana Imaging, Konstanz, Germany) administered in an antecubital vein at
a rate of 2.5 ml/s via an 18-gauge peripheral intravenous catheter. Abdominal plain
radiographs were performed in a supine and lateral position. Coverage included the
top of the liver to the pubic symphysis.
Image evaluation
CT scans were assessed by two readers in consensus (with 5 and 7 years of gastrointestinal
radiology experience) for the presence of colonic wall thickening as a radiological
criterion for the presence of colitis. Based on the criteria from previous reports,
an abnormal colonic wall thickness greater than or equal to 4 mm was defined as abnormal
[20]. The colon was divided into four segments (ascending, transverse, descending and
sigmoid), and any affected segment was noted. Involvement pattern was determined either
as segmental or as pancolic. The presence and quantity of ascites (small, moderate,
and large) was approximated. CT density measurements of ascites were performed to
assess the presence of blood constituent (HU > 40). The presence of pericolic stranding,
colonic wall contrast enhancement, and stenosis was assessed. The presence, location
and extent of colonic distension, air fluid levels, and free intra-abdominal air were
assessed by CT scans and radiographs. A colon diameter greater than 6 cm was considered
colonic distension.
Statistical analysis
Discrete variables are given as numbers and percentages, and continuous variables
as means ± standard deviation or means (95 % confidence intervals). The distribution
of data was tested. Data not normally distributed were log transformed to reach normal
distribution. Univariate analyses were performed using the Chi-square test for categorical
variables and Student’s t-test for continuous variables.
The McNemar test [21] was applied to determine whether wall thickening or pathologic colonic distension
occurred more often in distinct colonic segments in comparison to other segments.
Spearman correlation coefficient r was used to investigate the correlation with laboratory
parameters. A nominal p-value < 0.05, two-tailed, was considered statistically significant.
All statistical analyses were carried out using SAS 9.2 software.
Results
Study population
Abdominal imaging was performed within 7.2 ± 9.9 days (range: 1 – 46 days) after hospitalization
in all patients. The indications for referral to abdominal imaging were acute abdomen
in 10 of the 23 patients (43.5 %), and the search for an infectious focus and/or free
intra-abdominal air in the presence of critically elevated WBC or CRP in the remaining
13 patients (56.5 %). WBC was elevated in 20/23 patients (87.0 %) and CRP was elevated
in 21/23 patients (95.7 %). Detailed results of laboratory parameters are listed in
[Table 1]. 22 patients (95.7 %) presented with bloody diarrhea at the time of imaging. During
the further course of disease, 4/23 patients (17.4 %) were diagnosed with toxic megacolon.
5 of the 23 patients (21.7 %) underwent abdominal surgery due to their clinical condition.
In one of these patients hemicolectomy was performed due to extensive segmental inflammation.
In another patient subtotal colectomy was performed due to uncontrollable colonic
bleeding. The remaining three patients underwent surgical abdominal exploration and
lavage. One of the surgically explored patients and one diagnosed with toxic megacolon
died during the course of disease (2/23; 8.7 %). 20 of the 23 patients (87.0 %) were
diagnosed with HUS and 19/23 (82.6 %) had to undergo plasmapheresis and/or dialysis.
The mean hospitalization time was 25.7 ± 12.6 days (range: 1 – 59 days).
Table 1
Results of relevant biochemical parameters.[1]
Tab. 1 Ergebnisse der relevanten Laborparameter.
|
biochemical parameter
|
normal range
|
mean ± SD
|
range
|
number of patients with abnormal parameters (%)
|
|
|
12.3 – 17.5
|
9.7 ± 2.4
|
6.1 – 15.3
|
21/23
|
(91.3)
|
|
|
35 – 48
|
28.6 ± 7.5
|
18.6 – 45.0
|
21/23
|
(91.3)
|
|
|
4.1 – 5.9
|
3.3 ± 1.0
|
2.1 – 5.9
|
20/23
|
(87.0)
|
|
|
3.8 – 11.0
|
19.9 ± 7.9
|
8.8 – 45.6
|
20/23
|
(87.0)
|
|
|
150 – 400
|
139.4 ± 112.8
|
27 – 390
|
15/23
|
(65.2)
|
|
|
8.0 – 26.0
|
42.1 ± 22.7
|
7.0 – 86.0
|
19/23
|
(82.6)
|
|
|
0.5 – 1.3
|
3.1 ± 2.1
|
0.5 – 7.4
|
19/23
|
(82.6)
|
|
|
< 5
|
93.6 ± 68.9
|
5.0 – 276
|
21/23
|
(91.3)
|
|
|
135 – 225
|
810.1 ± 574.5
|
186 – 2019
|
22/23
|
(95.7)
|
1 LDH = Lactate dehydrogenase. Percentages are presented as numbers in parentheses.
Radiological findings
All of the 12 patients who underwent CT had abnormally thickened colonic wall segments
([Table 2]). 9 of these 12 (75 %) had segmental wall thickening, and 3 patients (25 %) had
pancolic involvement. The descending colon was predominantly affected (11/12 patients;
91.7 %) and thickened significantly more often than the ascending colon (p < 0.001),
transverse colon (p < 0.001), or sigmoid colon (p < 0.001). The maximal wall thickness
ranged from 6 – 19 mm (mean: 10.4 ± 4.5 mm). Increased contrast enhancement of colonic
wall segments was observed in 4/12 patients (33.3 %). Extensive abnormal wall thickening
with subtotal occlusion of the lumen and stenosis was observed in 3/12 patients (25 %).
In all three cases the descending colon was involved with consecutive upstream dilatation
of the transverse and ascending colon ([Fig. 1]). The upstream colonic dilatation was significantly higher (p = 0.012) in patients
with stenosis than in the remaining study population (82.0 mm [95 % CI, 65.7 – 98.3]
vs. 55.9 mm [95 % CI, 46.5 – 65.3]). All 12 patients who received CT scanning had
pericolic stranding around the affected segments.
Table 2
Specific imaging findings on abdominal CT (n = 12) and plain radiography (n = 11)
in all 23 patients. Findings that were assessed only by CT are listed below (n = 12).[1]
Tab. 2 Spezifische radiologische Befunde aller 23 Patienten, die sowohl auf den CT-Untersuchungen
(n = 12) als auch auf den Abdomenübersichtsradiografien (n = 11) erhoben werden konnten.
Darunter die Befunde, die nur mittels CT bestimmt werden konnten (n = 12).
|
radiological finding
|
number of affected patients (%)
|
|
colon distension
|
16/23
|
(69.6)
|
|
segmental distension
|
16/23
|
(69.6)
|
|
pancolic distension
|
0/23
|
(0.0)
|
|
|
11/23
|
(47.8)
|
|
|
12/23
|
(52.2)
|
|
|
1/23
|
(4.3)
|
|
|
0/23
|
(0.0)
|
|
air-fluid levels
|
5/23
|
(21.7)
|
|
free abdominal air
|
1/23
|
(4.3)
|
|
colonic wall thickening
|
12/12
|
(100.0)
|
|
segmental wall thickening
|
9/12
|
(75.0)
|
|
pancolic wall thickening
|
3/12
|
(25.0)
|
|
|
3/12
|
(25.0)
|
|
|
3/12
|
(25.0)
|
|
|
11/12
|
(91.7)
|
|
|
3/12
|
(25.0)
|
|
mural contrast enhancement
|
4/12
|
(33.3)
|
|
pericolic stranding
|
12/12
|
(100.0)
|
|
stenosis
|
3/12
|
(25.0)
|
|
ascites
|
10/12
|
(83.3)
|
|
|
2/12
|
(16.7)
|
|
|
5/12
|
(41.7)
|
|
|
3/12
|
(25.0)
|
1 Numbers in parentheses represent percentages.
Fig. 1 Coronal a and axial b CT images of a 23-year-old female patient with STEC O104:H4 colitis and HUS. The
patient suffered from persistent diarrhea and received dialysis and plasmapheresis
due to HUS. Seven days after hospitalization, the patient presented with severe abdominal
pain. CT demonstrated ascites, dilatation (up to 88 mm) of the ascending and transverse
colon a with air-fluid levels and marked circumferential thickening (up to 18 mm) of the
descending colonic wall (b, arrowheads). The colonic lumen was filled with contrast material applied two days
earlier for performing a gastrointestinal passage. The patient was diagnosed with
toxic megacolon. However, no further specific treatment was initiated, the symptoms
finally improved and the patient was discharged nine days after the CT examination.
Abb. 1 Koronare a und axiale b CT-Rekonstruktionen einer 23 Jahre alten Patientin mit STEC O104:H4-Kolitis und HUS. Die
Patientin litt unter persistierenden Durchfällen und wurde mittels Plasmapherese aufgrund
von HUS therapiert. Sieben Tage nach der initialen Aufnahme traten schwere abdominelle
Schmerzen auf. Die durchgeführte CT zeigt Aszites, Dilatation des aszendierenden und
transversalen Kolons (bis 88 mm) a mit Luft-Flüssigkeitsspiegeln und starker Wandverdickung (bis 18 mm) des deszendierenden
Kolons (b, Pfeilspitzen). Das Kolon ist noch mit Kontrastmittel einer zwei Tage zuvor durchgeführten
Magen-Darm-Passage gefüllt. Es wurde die Diagnose eines toxischen Megakolons gestellt.
Es wurde keine weitere spezifische Behandlung eingeleitet, dennoch verbesserte sich
der Zustand und die Patientin konnte 9 Tage nach der CT-Untersuchung entlassen werden.
Pathologic segmental colonic lumen distension was found in 16 of 23 patients (69.6 %)
who underwent abdominal CT or plain radiographs. The ascending colon (11/23 patients;
47.8 %) and transverse colon (12/23 patients; 52.2 %) were dilated significantly more
often (p = 0.006 and p = 0.003, respectively) than the descending colon (1/23; 4.3 %)
(Fig. [ 2], [3]). The mean diameter of the maximal distended colonic lumen was of 64 ± 18 mm (range
33 – 108 mm). The extent of colonic lumen distension was significantly (p = 0.008)
higher in patients with pathologic air-fluid levels (83.8 (95 % CI, 66.5 – 101.1)
cm), which were present in 5 of 23 patients (21.7 %), than in patients without pathologic
air-fluid levels (56.3 [95 % CI, 47.2 – 65.4] cm). Colonic lumen distension was significantly
higher (p = 0.0231) in patients with ascites (67.1 [95 % CI, 57.6 – 76.6] cm) than
in patients without ascites (39.0 [95 % CI, 17.7 – 60.3] cm). Ascites was present
in 10 of the 12 patients (83.3 %) undergoing CT. The quantity of ascites was considered
small in 2/10 patients (20 %), moderate in 5/10 cases (50 %), and large in 3/10 patients
(30 %). None of these patients presented with bloody ascites. Free abdominal air was
detected on plain abdominal radiography in one patient (4.3 %) who subsequently underwent
abdominal surgery and hemicolectomy.
Fig. 2 Supine view a and left lateral decubitus view b of an abdominal radiograph of a 31-year-old female patient with STEC O104:H4 colitis
and hemolytic-uremic syndrome. The patient presented with ulcerating and hemorrhagic
colitis and was treated with dialysis and plasmapheresis for 1 month. Abdominal radiography
a, b demonstrated dilatation of the ascending and transverse colon with air-fluid levels.
The patient was diagnosed with toxic megacolon. Due to extensive hemorrhagic diarrhea,
repeated blood transfusions were administered and subtotal colectomy was performed
two weeks later. After two months of hospitalization, the patient was discharged in
a healthy state.
Abb. 2 Abdomenübersicht in Rückenlage a sowie in Linksseitenlage b einer 41 Jahre alten Patientin mit STEC O104:H4-Kolitis und HUS. Die Patientin litt
an einer ulzerierenden und hämorrhagischen Kolitis und wurde über einen Monat mittels
Dialyse und Plasmapherese behandelt. Die Abdomenaufnahmen a, b zeigen eine massive Dilatation des aszendierenden und transversalen Kolons mit Luft-Flüssigkeitsspiegeln.
Es wurde die Diagnose eines toxischen Megakolons gestellt. Aufgrund der massiven hämorrhagischen
Durchfälle mussten wiederholt Bluttransfusionen durchgeführt werden und 2 Wochen später
eine subtotale Kolektomie durchgeführt werden. Nach insgesamt 2 Monaten Krankenhausaufenthalt
konnte die Patientin geheilt entlassen werden.
Fig. 3 Coronal a and axial b CT images of a 41-year-old female patient with STEC O104:H4 colitis. The patient
initially presented with hemorrhagic colitis. Two weeks after hospitalization, CT
demonstrated massive dilatation (up to 81 mm) of the ascending and transverse colon
a, b. The descending colon showed a normal lumen diameter but circumferential thickening
(up to 10 mm) of the colonic wall (a, b, arrowheads). One week after the CT, the patient suffered from acute and severe abdominal
pain and abdominal radiography (not shown) demonstrated free abdominal air and massive
dilatation of the ascending and transverse colon. The patient was diagnosed with toxic
megacolon and underwent hemicolectomy. Finally, after 6 weeks of hospitalization,
the patient was discharged in a healthy state.
Abb. 3 Koronare a und axiale b CT-Rekonstruktionen einer 41 Jahre alten Patientin mit STEC O104:H4-Kolitis. Die
Patientin wurde initial wegen einer hämorrhagischen Kolitis aufgenommen. Zwei Wochen
nach der Aufnahme zeigt das CT eine massive Dilatation (bis 81 mm) des aszendierenden
und transversalen Kolons a, b. Das deszendierende Kolon zeigt einen normalen Lumendiameter, aber eine zirkuläre
Wandverdickung (bis auf 10 mm) (a, b, Pfeilspitzen). Eine Woche nach der CT traten massive abdominelle Schmerzen auf und
die daraufhin durchgeführte Abdomenübersicht (nicht gezeigt) zeigte freie intraabdominelle
Luft sowie eine massive Dilatation des aszendierenden und transversalen Kolons. Es
wurde ein toxisches Megakolon diagnostiziert und eine Hemikolektomie durchgeführt.
Nach 6 Wochen konnte die Patientin geheilt entlassen werden.
Comparison of radiological findings, laboratory parameters and clinical parameters
In the initial comparison of radiological findings and clinical parameters, pathological
lumen distension of the transverse colon was associated with reduced hemoglobin (difference:
1.9 g/dl [0.07 – 3.9 g/dl], p = 0.059), hematocrit (difference: 6.4 % [0.5 – 12.4 %],
p = 0.047), and erythrocytes (difference: 0.88 × 1012/l [0.12 – 1.64 × 1012/l), p = 0.025). Moreover, pathologic lumen distension was higher (difference 31.5 mm
[0.7 – 62.3 mm], p = 0.046) in the two patients who died during the course of disease
as compared to the remainder of the study population. However, the extent of pathologic
lumen distension associated neither with the indication for abdominal surgery (p = 0.260)
nor with the duration of hospitalization (p = 0.512). Also, neither the indication
for surgery nor the duration of hospitalization was associated with any other radiological
findings.
Discussion
Review of abdominal radiographic findings of 23 patients with STEC O104:H4 colitis
revealed a high incidence of abnormal wall thickening of the descending colon with
pericolic stranding and upstream abnormal transverse and/or ascending colonic lumen
distension. Two patients with a fatal course presented with massive distension of
the transverse colon. However, no significant association between radiological findings
and clinical parameters was found. One of the 23 patients underwent immediate surgery
due to the presence of free abdominal air. The remaining 22 patients did not require
immediate surgical intervention. Due to the high percentage of women in the STEC O104:H4
population during the German outbreak 2011 [7]
[18], 70 % of the patients in this study were female.
There is considerable overlap in the clinical appearance of various infectious types
of colitis. They are usually confirmed clinically on the basis of stool and blood
analyses and/or colonoscopy supported by biopsy results. All infectious types of colitis
share the radiological features of wall thickening, pericolic stranding, and various
degrees of ascites [12]
[13]
[14]
[15]. In most infectious forms of colitis the distribution is contiguous or pancolic
[12]
[13]
[22]. This is in contrast to the findings of this study, where the majority of patients
presented with segmental involvement. Previous imaging studies of E. coli colitis
reported contiguous involvement with the transverse colon being most often affected
[23]
[24]. In contrast, this study revealed a predominance of descending colon wall thickening
with abnormally distended but normal wall thickness of the transverse colon, likely
due to the downstream constriction of the involved wall of the descending colon. Pseudomembranous
colitis also demonstrates marked wall thickening, but can be clinically differentiated
due to its association with broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment and the detection
of clostridium difficile toxin in the stool. Neutropenic colitis is characterized
by right-sided colonic and ileal involvement, which was never observed in the patients
of this study with STEC O104:H4 infection [12]. Diverticulitis can be discriminated, since the process is focal and asymmetric
with fascial thickening and inflamed diverticula [25]. Hence, the presence of abnormal transverse and/or ascending colonic lumen distension
with a descending colon with wall thickening seems be a characteristic finding in
patients with STEC O104:H4.
The presence of ascites was observed in > 80 % of the CT scans. This is an unspecific
finding in all types of infectious colitis, but is rarely associated with ulcerative
colitis and Crohn’s disease [12]. Increased contrast enhancement of the colonic wall was observed in a minority of
patients and no specific pattern was identified. The degree of bowel wall thickening
is said to aid in the differential diagnosis of colonic disease [14]
[26]. However, the maximal bowel wall thickening ranged from 6 to 19 mm in this study
population, which seems to preclude establishing a specific diagnosis based on the
degree of colonic wall thickening alone.
Patients with hemorrhagic E. coli colitis are at increased risk for HUS and other
severe complications. Therefore, it is crucial to diagnose the disease promptly. The
list of differential diagnoses for E. coli colitis includes appendicitis, ischemic
colitis, inflammatory bowel disease, as well as infectious colitis due to Shigella,
salmonella, Campylobacter, Clostridium difficile or cytomegalovirus [12]
[13]
[23]. Diagnostic imaging is generally not required for the differential diagnosis of
E. coli colitis. The diagnosis is classically established by clinical and laboratory
findings. However, the nature of abdominal pain is nonspecific, and abdominal imaging
is ordered for its evaluation. Moreover, the spectrum of illness associated with E.
coli colitis is broad and may range from asymptomatic infection to hemorrhagic colitis
and can rapidly progress to HUS, a life-threatening condition [3]
[23]. Hence, not all patients with STEC O104:H4 colitis present with classic symptoms
such as cramps and hemorrhagic diarrhea, but rather with generalized constitutional
symptoms, constipation or even an acute abdomen [2]. In these patients specific radiological findings could lead to correct diagnosis
and appropriate patient management. Clinical history and laboratory testing are critical
to exclude other colitides that may mimic STEC O104:H4 colitis. However, the purpose
of this retrospective study was not to assess the value of abdominal CT or radiography
for aiding the diagnosis of an infection with SO104:H4, but rather to define abdominal
radiological findings in these patients. Increased radiologist awareness of STEC O104:H4
colitis will expand the differential diagnosis in patients with suspected colitis
and prevent inappropriate medical or surgical treatment.
The patients with STEC O104:H4 colitis during the outbreak in 2011 were most often
treated medically by supportive measures directed toward maintaining hydration and
electrolyte balance. Hence, abdominal imaging played a prominent role in excluding
the need for immediate surgical intervention in severe cases. In only one of the 23
studied patients abdominal imaging revealed free abdominal air and immediate surgical
treatment including hemicolectomy was initiated. In all other cases surgical interventions
were performed days later, based on worsening of clinical symptoms and progressive
system deterioration.
Due to its retrospective nature, there are inherent limitations to this study. Only
8.5 % of all E. coli O104:H4-positive patients treated in our institution during the
outbreak 2011 underwent abdominal imaging. Only severely affected cases were referred
to abdominal CT or radiography which leads to a potential selection bias. Of note,
only one patient underwent immediate surgery after imaging. Moreover, this was an
observational study, and nominal p-values without adjustment for multiplicity are
reported. The study was not powered for a multitude of statistical tests. Although
we identified characteristic diagnostic findings for E. coli O104:H4 colitis, the
only way to determine the exact clinical impact of abdominal imaging would be a prospective
study with colonoscopy as the gold standard for the exact assessment of inflammatory
changes, and newer imaging modalities including CT colonography and diffusion-weighted
magnetic resonance imaging with the measurement of multiple clinical and radiological
parameters [27]
[28]
[29]
[30]. However, practical considerations preclude such a study.
In summary, the main finding observed in all CT scans of hospitalized patients with
E. coli O104:H4 colitis was abnormal wall thickening of the descending colon with
pericolic stranding and upstream abnormal transverse and/or ascending colonic lumen
distension. While thickening of the descending colonic wall may be seen as a nonspecific
sign, the combination with massive upstream dilatation of the transverse and/or ascending
colonic lumen can be used to narrow down the differential diagnosis. The final diagnosis
concerning the type of colitis is based on clinical and laboratory data, but recognizing
specific abdominal imaging features helps to narrow down the differential diagnosis.
In conclusion, in the presence of abnormal radiological findings with the proper clinical
history, abdominal imaging can aid the diagnosis of E. coli O104:H4 colitis and may
prevent unnecessary medical or surgical treatment in possible future outbreaks.
