Intestinal ultrasound offers prognostic value in IBD pregnancy
"We rely very little on symptoms in pregnancy — they’re so unreliable — and instead target fecal calprotectin under 100 and sonographic remission."
-
09/29/2025
-
by Kerri Miller
Active inflammatory bowel disease detected by intestinal ultrasound during pregnancy is strongly associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, even when clinical scores suggest remission, according to the large international PICCOLO-X study published in Gastroenterology. Conducted from 2017 to 2023 at St Vincent’s Hospital Melbourne, Monash Health in Australia, and Mount Sinai in New York, the study followed 377 pregnant women with IBD, of whom 234 underwent intestinal ultrasound and 331 provided fecal calprotectin samples.
Researchers found that maximal bowel wall thickness greater than 6 mm in the second trimester was linked to a fourfold increased risk of preterm delivery and a twofold increased risk of low birth weight. Each additional millimeter of bowel wall thickness in the second trimester was also associated with a higher risk of gestational diabetes.
Hyperemia detected on ultrasound correlated with a threefold increase in the risk of preeclampsia. Intestinal ultrasound often revealed active disease that clinical scores or fecal calprotectin failed to detect. In the first trimester, 16% of women who appeared to be in remission by calprotectin had active disease on ultrasound, most commonly ileal Crohn’s disease. A similar discordance was observed in the second trimester.
Clinical outcomes reflected these findings: 5.9% of participants delivered prematurely, 5.8% of infants had low birth weight, and nearly one-quarter required neonatal intensive or special care admission. Among women with objective disease activity in the first trimester, treatment was escalated in 20 cases, and one-quarter of those achieved both biochemical and sonographic remission by the second trimester.
Of the cohort, 198 participants had Crohn’s disease and 171 had ulcerative colitis or IBD-unclassified, with more than half receiving advanced therapy during pregnancy. Rates of treatment exposure were similar regardless of ultrasound disease activity, noted Ralley E. Prentice, FRACP, of the Department of Gastroenterology, Monash Health, Victoria, Australia, and colleagues.
Ultrasound proved feasible but not without challenges: median gestational age at scanning was 11 weeks in the first trimester and 20 weeks in the second trimester, and image quality was compromised in 6.7% of first trimester and 22.3% of second-trimester scans, primarily due to gravid uterus or maternal body habitus. The authors emphasized that reliance on endoscopy or MRI during pregnancy is limited by safety and convenience, making ultrasound a valuable tool.
"We rely very little on symptoms in pregnancy—they’re so unreliable—and instead target fecal calprotectin under 100 and sonographic remission," said lead author Dr. Prentice in an interview with Conexiant.
"The routine use of endoscopy or magnetic resonance imaging during pregnancy is limited by inconvenience and safety concerns," noted investigators. Findings showed poor agreement between clinical scoring systems and objective measures of disease activity.
Limitations included relatively low numbers of adverse outcomes, variable protocol adherence, and incomplete data acquisition due to late pregnancy referrals. Approximately half of participants were assessed with all three disease activity methods in the first and second trimesters.
Summary content
7 Key Takeaways
-
1
Developed a paper-based colorimetric sensor array for chemical threat detection.
-
2
Can detect 12 chemical agents, including industrial toxins.
-
3
Production cost is under 20 cents per chip.
-
4
Utilizes dye-loaded silica particles on self-adhesive paper.
-
5
Provides rapid, simultaneous identification through image analysis.
-
6
Inspired by the mammalian olfactory system for pattern recognition.
-
7
Future developments include a machine learning-enabled reader device.
The guidelines emphasize four-hour gastric emptying studies over two-hour testing. How do you see this affecting diagnostic workflows in practice?
Dr. Staller: Moving to a four-hour solid-meal scintigraphy will actually simplify decision-making. The two-hour reads miss a meaningful proportion of delayed emptying; standardizing on four hours reduces false negatives and the “maybe gastroparesis” purgatory that leads to repeat testing. Practically, it means closer coordination with nuclear medicine (longer slots, consistent standardized meal), updating order sets to default to a four-hour protocol, and educating front-line teams so patients arrive appropriately prepped. The payoff is fewer equivocal studies and more confident treatment plans.
Metoclopramide and erythromycin are the only agents conditionally recommended for initial therapy. How does this align with what is being currently prescribed?
Dr. Staller: This largely mirrors real-world practice. Metoclopramide remains the only FDA-approved prokinetic for gastroparesis, and short “pulsed” erythromycin courses are familiar to many of us—recognizing tachyphylaxis limits durability. Our recommendation is “conditional” because the underlying evidence is modest and patient responses are heterogeneous, but it formalizes what many clinicians already do: start with metoclopramide (lowest effective dose, limited duration, counsel on neurologic adverse effects) and reserve erythromycin for targeted use (exacerbations, bridging).
Several agents, including domperidone and prucalopride, received recommendations against first-line use. How will that influence discussions with patients who ask about these therapies?
Dr. Staller: Two points I share with patients: evidence and access/safety. For domperidone, the data quality is mixed, and US access is through an FDA IND mechanism; you’re committing patients to EKG monitoring and a non-trivial administrative lift. For prucalopride, the gastroparesis-specific evidence isn’t strong enough yet to justify first-line use. So, our stance is not “never,” it’s just “not first.” If someone fails or cannot tolerate initial therapy, we can revisit these options through shared decision-making, setting expectations about benefit, monitoring, and off-label use. The guideline language helps clinicians have a transparent, evidence-based conversation at the first visit.
The guidelines suggest reserving procedures like G-POEM and gastric electrical stimulation for refractory cases. In your practice, how do you decide when a patient is “refractory” to medical therapy?
Dr. Staller: I define “refractory” with three anchors.
1. Adequate trials of foundational care: dietary optimization and glycemic control; an antiemetic; and at least one prokinetic at appropriate dose/duration (with intolerance documented if stopped early).
2. Persistent, function-limiting symptoms: ongoing nausea/vomiting, weight loss, dehydration, ER visits/hospitalizations, or malnutrition despite the above—ideally tracked with a validated instrument (e.g., GCSI) plus nutritional metrics.
3. Objective correlation: delayed emptying on a standardized 4-hour solid-meal study that aligns with the clinical picture (and medications that slow emptying addressed).
At that point, referral to a center with procedural expertise for G-POEM or consideration of gastric electrical stimulation becomes appropriate, with multidisciplinary evaluation (GI, nutrition, psychology, and, when needed, surgery).
What role do you see dietary modification and glycemic control playing alongside pharmacologic therapy in light of these recommendations?
Dr. Staller: They’re the bedrock. A small-particle, lower-fat, calorie-dense diet—often leaning on nutrient-rich liquids—can meaningfully reduce symptom burden. Partnering with dietitians early pays dividends. For diabetes, tighter glycemic control can improve gastric emptying and symptoms; I explicitly review medications that can slow emptying (e.g., opioids; consider timing/necessity of GLP-1 receptor agonists) and encourage continuous glucose monitor-informed adjustments. Pharmacotherapy sits on top of those pillars; without them, medications will likely underperform.
The guideline notes “considerable unmet need” in gastroparesis treatment. Where do you think future therapies or research are most urgently needed?
Dr. Staller: I see three major areas.
1. Truly durable prokinetics: agents that improve emptying and symptoms over months, with better safety than legacy options (e.g., next-gen motilin/ghrelin agonists, better-studied 5-HT4 strategies).
2. Endotyping and biomarkers: we need to stop treating all gastroparesis as one disease. Clinical, physiologic, and microbiome/omic signatures that predict who benefits from which therapy (drug vs G-POEM vs GES) would transform care.
3. Patient-centered trials: larger, longer RCTs that prioritize validated symptom and quality-of-life outcomes, include nutritional endpoints, and reflect real-world medication confounders.
Our guideline intentionally highlights these gaps to hopefully catalyze better trials and smarter referral pathways.
Dr. Staller is with the Division of Gastroenterology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston.