Beyond the mucosa: intestinal ultrasound for post-endoscopic healing risk stratification in ulcerative colitis
Rattachement africain : jp. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
We congratulate the authors for demonstrating that transmural healing (TH), assessed by intestinal ultrasound (IUS), more accurately predicts relapse in ulcerative colitis (UC) than endoscopic healing (EH).1 IUS provides a practical, non-invasive way to interrogate the bowel wall beyond the mucosa and to bring imaging to the bedside. The observation that TH, defined as bowel wall thickness (BWT) in <3 mm, identifies a subgroup with more durable remission underscores the promise of ultrasound-guided care in the maintenance phase. Importantly, the benefit of TH was independent of Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES) status, highlighting its additive prognostic value beyond EH alone. This should be seen as complementary, not antithetical, to EH. In clinical practice, EH and TH frequently co-occur but are not synonymous. The most clinically salient population may be patients with MES of 1, where residual submucosal activity is plausible and therapeutic decisions are nuanced. In this setting, a “TH-positive” result may reassure clinicians continuing the current treatment or even considering treatment de-escalation, whereas a “TH-negative” result may prompt treatment intensification or closer monitoring. Positioning IUS as additive to endoscopy aligns with contemporary multimodal treat-to-target principles.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Beyond the mucosa: intestinal ultrasound for post-endoscopic healing risk stratification in ulcerative colitis
- Date Crossref
- 31/01/2026
- Éditeur
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.