BACKGROUND: Endoscopic surveillance in patients with long-standing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) improves early detection of intraepithelial neoplasia (IEN). We aimed to compare three different endoscopic surveillance strategies in the detection of IEN. METHODS: One hundred fifty surveillance colonoscopies (ulcerative colitis, UC n = 141; Crohn's disease, CD n = 9) were carried out. Random quadrant biopsies were taken (group I, n = 50). Chromoendoscopy with indigo carmine was performed and subsequently quadrant biopsies were collected (group II, n = 50). Patients in group III (n = 50) underwent confocal endomicroscopy (CEM), and CEM-guided as well as random quadrant biopsies were taken (group III, n = 50). The findings of CEM were correlated to conventional histology. Patients with high-grade IEN underwent surgery or strict follow-up by patients' request. RESULTS: In group I (1531 biopsies), no IEN was detected by histology. In group II (1,811 biopsies), chromoendoscopy-guided biopsies revealed high-grade IEN in two patients (4% detection rate). In four patients of group III (1477 biopsies), areas with high-grade IEN were clearly visible by CEM and confirmed by histology (8% detection rate, p < 0.05). Of six patients with high-grade IEN, five patients underwent proctocolectomy. Colorectal cancer was detected in one out of five patients. CONCLUSION: Targeted biopsy protocols guided by either chromoendoscopy or CEM led to higher detection rates of IEN and are thus mandatory for surveillance colonoscopies in patients with long-standing UC. Random biopsy protocols should be replaced by chromoendoscopy-guided protocols.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic surveillance in patients with long-standing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) improves early detection of intraepithelial neoplasia (IEN). We aimed to compare three different endoscopic surveillance strategies in the detection of IEN. METHODS: One hundred fifty surveillance colonoscopies (ulcerative colitis, UC n = 141; Crohn's disease, CD n = 9) were carried out. Random quadrant biopsies were taken (group I, n = 50). Chromoendoscopy with indigo carmine was performed and subsequently quadrant biopsies were collected (group II, n = 50). Patients in group III (n = 50) underwent confocal endomicroscopy (CEM), and CEM-guided as well as random quadrant biopsies were taken (group III, n = 50). The findings of CEM were correlated to conventional histology. Patients with high-grade IEN underwent surgery or strict follow-up by patients' request. RESULTS: In group I (1531 biopsies), no IEN was detected by histology. In group II (1,811 biopsies), chromoendoscopy-guided biopsies revealed high-grade IEN in two patients (4% detection rate). In four patients of group III (1477 biopsies), areas with high-grade IEN were clearly visible by CEM and confirmed by histology (8% detection rate, p < 0.05). Of six patients with high-grade IEN, five patients underwent proctocolectomy. Colorectal cancer was detected in one out of five patients. CONCLUSION: Targeted biopsy protocols guided by either chromoendoscopy or CEM led to higher detection rates of IEN and are thus mandatory for surveillance colonoscopies in patients with long-standing UC. Random biopsy protocols should be replaced by chromoendoscopy-guided protocols.
Authors: Ralf Kiesslich; Martin Goetz; Katharina Lammersdorf; Constantin Schneider; Juergen Burg; Manfred Stolte; Michael Vieth; Bernhard Nafe; Peter R Galle; Markus F Neurath Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2007-01-31 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Matthew D Rutter; Brian P Saunders; Kay H Wilkinson; Steve Rumbles; Gillian Schofield; Michael A Kamm; Christopher B Williams; Ashley B Price; Ian C Talbot; Alastair Forbes Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: W R Connell; J E Lennard-Jones; C B Williams; I C Talbot; A B Price; K H Wilkinson Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 1994-10 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: C E Rubin; R C Haggitt; G C Burmer; T A Brentnall; A C Stevens; D S Levine; P J Dean; M Kimmey; D R Perera; P S Rabinovitch Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 1992-11 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: James F Marion; Jerome D Waye; Daniel H Present; Yuriy Israel; Carol Bodian; Noam Harpaz; Mark Chapman; Steven Itzkowitz; Adam F Steinlauf; Maria T Abreu; Thomas A Ullman; James Aisenberg; Lloyd Mayer Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Richard B Gearry; Christopher J Wakeman; Murray L Barclay; Bruce A Chapman; Judith A Collett; Michael J Burt; Frank A Frizelle Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Ralf Kiesslich; Juergen Burg; Michael Vieth; Janina Gnaendiger; Meike Enders; Peter Delaney; Adrian Polglase; Wendy McLaren; Daniela Janell; Steven Thomas; Bernhard Nafe; Peter R Galle; Markus F Neurath Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: F J C van den Broek; P Fockens; S van Eeden; J B Reitsma; J C H Hardwick; P C F Stokkers; E Dekker Journal: Gut Date: 2008-03-26 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Gauree Gupta Konijeti; Mark G Shrime; Ashwin N Ananthakrishnan; Andrew T Chan Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2013-11-18 Impact factor: 9.427