An interventional study of Transperineal Ultrasound (TPUS) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in Crohn Disease (CD) and Cryptoglandular Perianal Fistula, sponsored by Asian Institute of Gastroenterology, India. Recruiting at 1 site in India. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 75 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-31.
Sponsored by Asian Institute of Gastroenterology, India · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic
The goal of this study is to learn how well different imaging tests detect and describe perianal fistulas in adults with Crohn's disease or fistulas with no known cause (cryptogenic). Perianal fistulas are painful tunnels that form near the anus and can lead to discharge, swelling, or infection. The main questions this study aims to answer are:
How accurate is transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in finding fistulas? How well do these tests identify key features like internal openings and abscesses? Do the test results help doctors make better treatment decisions?
Researchers will compare TPUS and MRI to two other imaging methods:
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), which uses a small camera and ultrasound inside the rectum Examination under anesthesia (EUA), in which a surgeon checks the area while the participant is asleep
All participants will:
Be adults between the ages of 18 and 75 Have a suspected or confirmed perianal fistula Be able to complete all four tests-TPUS, MRI, EUS, and EUA-within 10 days Participants will not receive any experimental treatments. The tests are part of routine care and will be done using advanced equipment by expert doctors. Each test result will be used to compare how accurate and useful the test is in real-life diagnosis and treatment planning.
This study may help make fistula diagnosis faster, safer, and more affordable-especially in settings where access to MRI or surgery is limited. It may also support the use of TPUS as a first step in evaluating perianal fistulas in people with Crohn's disease.
Perianal fistulas are a challenging and often debilitating complication of anorectal and inflammatory bowel diseases, particularly Crohn's disease. Up to 40% of people with Crohn's disease may develop perianal fistulas during the course of their illness. These fistulas are frequently complex, may recur, and can severely affect quality of life. They are associated with symptoms such as discharge, swelling, pain, infection, and, in some cases, incontinence or systemic sepsis. Accurate diagnosis and anatomical characterization of these fistulas are essential for determining the most effective medical and surgical treatment strategies.
Traditional imaging strategies include Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), which is currently considered the non-invasive standard for anatomical delineation, and Examination Under Anesthesia (EUA), which serves as the gold standard due to the ability to directly examine the anatomy and intervene surgically if necessary. However, both methods have limitations. MRI is costly, may not be readily available in resource-limited settings, and is not suitable for all patients (e.g., those with certain implants or claustrophobia). EUA is invasive, requires anesthesia, and may not be feasible for repeated use in follow-up or outpatient care.
Alternative imaging modalities such as Transperineal Ultrasound (TPUS) and Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) are being explored for their diagnostic utility. TPUS is a non-invasive, low-cost, real-time modality that can be performed at the bedside or in outpatient settings. EUS, while more invasive, offers high-resolution images of the anal canal and surrounding structures and is increasingly used for evaluating anorectal diseases.
The TRANSIT-CD study (A Quadrimodal Comparison of TRAnsperiNeal and MR-based Sonographic Investigation with Integrated Testing using Endoscopic Ultrasound and Examination Under Anesthesia) is a prospective, single-center, diagnostic accuracy study designed to compare the performance of four imaging modalities-TPUS, MRI, EUS, and EUA-in evaluating perianal fistulas in people with Crohn's disease and cryptogenic (non-Crohn's) fistulas.
Study Design and Objectives The study will enroll adults aged 18 to 75 years with a clinical diagnosis or suspicion of perianal fistula. Each participant will undergo four imaging tests-TPUS, MRI, EUS, and EUA-within a maximum interval of 10 days. The order of testing is predefined and all interpretations will be performed independently by blinded experts in each modality.
The primary objective is to compare the per-lesion sensitivity of TPUS and MRI for detecting perianal fistulas, using EUS as the reference standard and EUA as the gold standard.
Secondary objectives include:
Comparing TPUS and MRI for detecting internal openings and perianal abscesses Evaluating classification accuracy using Parks classification and American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) criteria (simple vs. complex fistulas) Determining whether findings from TPUS and MRI result in a change in clinical management
Exploratory objectives include:
Assessing diagnostic accuracy by disease type (Crohn's vs. cryptogenic) Comparing modality performance in high (above the levator ani muscle) vs. low fistulas Evaluating inter-modality agreement and confidence levels of reporting physicians Methodology
Transperineal Ultrasound (TPUS) Performed by an expert radiologist using a high-end ultrasound platform with microconvex and high-frequency linear probes. The patient is positioned in the left lateral decubitus position. Both axial and sagittal images are obtained. Parameters assessed include tract presence, type, internal openings, secondary extensions, and associated abscesses.
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Conducted using a 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner with T2-weighted, STIR, and post-contrast T1-weighted fat-suppressed sequences in axial, sagittal, and coronal planes. MRI findings are independently interpreted by radiologists blinded to TPUS and EUS findings. Fistulas are characterized using standard classification systems and the presence of abscesses and internal openings is documented.
Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) EUS is performed using a linear echoendoscope and dedicated EUS processor. The procedure does not require bowel preparation. A 360-degree evaluation of the anal canal and surrounding structures is performed to detect fistulous tracts, internal openings, and collections. EUS serves as the reference standard for diagnostic comparison.
Examination Under Anesthesia (EUA) EUA is performed by an experienced colorectal surgeon under spinal or general anesthesia. This procedure allows direct probing of the fistula tract, identification of internal openings, and classification of the fistula using tactile and visual assessment. EUA is considered the gold standard in this study.
Each modality's findings are documented in structured case report forms. The findings include:
Fistula presence and number Parks classification and AGA complexity score Internal and external openings Abscess presence and dimensions Secondary tracts Confidence scores All data are recorded per lesion, per patient.
Blinding and Data Integrity All imaging studies will be interpreted independently by modality-specific experts, who are blinded to the findings of other modalities. Discrepant findings will be resolved through consensus by the principal investigators. A secure electronic database will be used for data capture, ensuring patient confidentiality and auditability.
Clinical Impact Assessment The study will also track whether imaging findings lead to a change in management plans (e.g., additional imaging, medical therapy, surgical planning). These decisions will be documented by treating clinicians based on the initial and subsequent imaging findings.
Sample Size and Statistical Analysis
This pilot study aims to recruit approximately 100 participants. Based on previous literature (Maconi et al., 2017), the study is powered to detect a difference in diagnostic sensitivity between TPUS and MRI. The analysis includes:
Calculation of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) McNemar's test for paired comparisons Cohen's kappa for inter-modality agreement Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis Subgroup analyses by diagnosis type and fistula location
Significance This is the first prospective study to compare all four major imaging modalities in the same patient cohort with suspected or confirmed perianal fistulas. By benchmarking TPUS and MRI against both EUS and EUA, the TRANSIT-CD study provides a robust framework for evaluating diagnostic accuracy and impact on care. The results may support broader use of TPUS as a first-line diagnostic tool, particularly in outpatient and low-resource settings where access to MRI or EUA is limited. It may also help refine imaging protocols for complex perianal Crohn's disease.
Ethical Considerations All imaging procedures in this study are part of routine clinical care. No experimental treatments are being tested. The study has been approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee and informed consent will be obtained from all participants. There are no additional risks introduced beyond standard diagnostic procedures. All data will be anonymized and securely stored.
1,992 studies on the registry are indexed under Crohn Disease; 478 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 50 is below the median of 67 across 1,260 interventional studies indexed under Crohn Disease.
Browse Crohn Disease studies →Asian Institute of Gastroenterology, India is the lead sponsor of 135 studies on the registry; 59 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Malignancy means cancer. Criteria about another or earlier malignancy ask whether you have had a different cancer, usually within a set number of years.
Some are commonly allowed, such as treated skin cancers other than melanoma and early cancers removed completely — check the exceptions this study lists.
A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Cancer (malignancy)
Malignancy means cancer. Criteria about another or earlier malignancy ask whether you have had a different cancer, usually within a set number of years.
Some are commonly allowed, such as treated skin cancers other than melanoma and early cancers removed completely — check the exceptions this study lists.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Contraindication
A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
All participants in this arm will undergo four diagnostic imaging procedures-transperineal ultrasound (TPUS), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and examination under anesthesia (EUA)-in a predefined sequence. Each imaging modality will be used to evaluate the presence, type, and extent of perianal fistulas. This single-arm design allows within-subject comparison of diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact across modalities.
Diagnostic Test: Transperineal Ultrasound (TPUS) · Diagnostic Test: Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) · Diagnostic Test: Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) · Diagnostic Test: Examination Under Anesthesia (EUA)
Participants will undergo TPUS using a high-frequency linear and microconvex probe to evaluate fistula tracts, internal openings, and abscesses.
MRI of the pelvis will be performed using standardized T2-weighted, STIR, and post-contrast sequences for anatomical characterization of fistulas.
EUS of the anorectal canal will be performed using a linear echoendoscope to visualize internal openings, fistula tracts, and perirectal collections. EUS serves as the reference standard.
Participants will undergo EUA by a colorectal surgeon to probe fistula tracts and identify internal openings. EUA serves as the gold standard comparator.
Per-lesion sensitivity of transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for detecting perianal fistulas
To determine and compare the diagnostic sensitivity of TPUS and MRI for identifying individual fistulous tracts, using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) as the reference standard and examination under anesthesia (EUA) as the gold standard.
Time frame: Within 10 days of enrollment (all four imaging modalities completed within this window)
Sensitivity of TPUS vs MRI for detecting internal openings
Compare how well TPUS and MRI detect internal openings of perianal fistulas, using EUS and EUA as benchmarks.
Time frame: Within 10 days of enrollment
Classification accuracy (Parks criteria) of transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) versus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
Compare the ability of TPUS and MRI to correctly classify fistulas using the Parks classification system, compared to examination under anaesthesia (EUA).
Time frame: Within 10 days of enrollment
Sensitivity of transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) vs magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for detecting perianal abscesses
Evaluate the ability of TPUS and MRI to detect perianal abscesses compared with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and examinaion under anaesthesia (EUA).
Time frame: Within 10 days of enrollment
Impact on clinical management based on imaging modality
Proportion of participants whose treatment plan was changed after magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) vs after transperineal ultrasound (TPUS).
Time frame: Up to 14 days after imaging
Plan to share: No — Individual participant data (IPD) will not be shared publicly due to the nature of the diagnostic imaging data, which includes potentially identifiable health information. Data will be stored securely and used only by the study team for the purpose of predefined analyses. Any future data sharing will require additional ethical approval and participant consent.
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Started Jul 2025 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Apr 2027, 20 months after the start.
Of 287 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Crohn Disease, half reached primary completion within 46 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 22 and three quarters within 67. This study's planned 20 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 299 studies reached it within 45 months; a quarter within 21 and three quarters within 65.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
Contact study teamGet an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Asian Institute of Gastroenterology, India →