Literature DB >> 21601201

Adherence to biopsy guidelines increases celiac disease diagnosis.

Benjamin Lebwohl1, Robert C Kapel, Alfred I Neugut, Peter H R Green, Robert M Genta.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Celiac disease (CD) is common but underdiagnosed in the United States. A proposed quality guideline recommends that ≥4 specimens be submitted during duodenal biopsy. The degree of adherence to this recommendation in clinical practice is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To measure the number of specimens submitted during duodenal biopsy among patients throughout the United States and to determine the incremental diagnostic yield of adherence to the recommended number of specimens.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENTS: This study involved 132,352 patients without known CD who underwent duodenal biopsy. INTERVENTION: Duodenal biopsy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Duodenal biopsy specimens were submitted to a pathology laboratory operating in 43 states in the United States. We used multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with submitting ≥4 specimens. We also compared the prevalence of newly diagnosed CD in biopsies with ≥4 specimens with that in biopsies with <4 specimens.
RESULTS: Of the 132,352 patients who underwent biopsy (67% women, mean age 52.9 years), ≥4 specimens were submitted in 45,995 cases (35%). A modest increase in the proportion of biopsies with ≥4 specimens occurred after this guideline was proposed in 2006 (odds ratio for 2009 vs 2006, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-1.88), but the rate of adherence in 2009 remained low at 37%. Among patients in whom the indication was malabsorption/suspected CD (n = 3261), adherence to this standard was only 39.5%. The probability of a new diagnosis of CD was increased when ≥4 specimens were submitted (1.8% vs 0.7%; P < .0001). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective analysis lacking clinical follow-up. The guideline publication occurred during the study period, possibly influencing clinical practice and confounding results.
CONCLUSION: Although this proposed standard remains a subject of debate, adherence to submitting ≥4 specimens is low in the United States. Adherence yields a diagnosis rate of 1.8%, a small absolute increase but a doubling of the diagnosis rate of CD. Efforts to increase adherence are warranted.
Copyright © 2011 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21601201      PMCID: PMC3651876          DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.03.1236

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  27 in total

1.  Risk of malignancy in diagnosed coeliac disease: a 24-year prospective, population-based, cohort study.

Authors:  T R Card; J West; G K T Holmes
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2004-10-01       Impact factor: 8.171

Review 2.  American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute technical review on the diagnosis and management of celiac disease.

Authors:  Alaa Rostom; Joseph A Murray; Martin F Kagnoff
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Endoscopist can be more powerful than age and male gender in predicting adenoma detection at colonoscopy.

Authors:  Shawn C Chen; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-01-11       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 4.  Celiac disease.

Authors:  Peter H R Green; Christophe Cellier
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-10-25       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Variation in small bowel biopsy performance among diverse endoscopy settings: results from a national endoscopic database.

Authors:  Gavin C Harewood; Jennifer L Holub; David A Lieberman
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 6.  Optimal approach to obtaining mucosal biopsies for assessment of inflammatory disorders of the gastrointestinal tract.

Authors:  Rhonda K Yantiss; Robert D Odze
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-02-10       Impact factor: 10.864

7.  Risk of malignancy in patients with celiac disease.

Authors:  Peter H R Green; Aaron T Fleischauer; Govind Bhagat; Rishi Goyal; Bana Jabri; Alfred I Neugut
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2003-08-15       Impact factor: 4.965

8.  Trends in the identification and clinical features of celiac disease in a North American community, 1950-2001.

Authors:  Joseph A Murray; Carol Van Dyke; Matthew F Plevak; Ross A Dierkhising; Alan R Zinsmeister; L Joseph Melton
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 11.382

9.  How many duodenal biopsy specimens are required to make a diagnosis of celiac disease?

Authors:  Wilson P Pais; Donald R Duerksen; Norman M Pettigrew; Charles N Bernstein
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Patchy villous atrophy in adult patients with suspected gluten-sensitive enteropathy: is a multiple duodenal biopsy strategy appropriate?

Authors:  A D Hopper; S S Cross; D S Sanders
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2008-12-05       Impact factor: 10.093

View more
  40 in total

1.  Procedure volume influences adherence to celiac disease guidelines.

Authors:  Benjamin Lebwohl; Robert M Genta; Robert C Kapel; Daniel Sheehan; Nina S Lerner; Peter H Green; Alfred I Neugut; Andrew Rundle
Journal:  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 2.566

2.  Increased Risk of Esophageal Eosinophilia and Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Patients With Active Celiac Disease on Biopsy.

Authors:  Elizabeth T Jensen; Swathi Eluri; Benjamin Lebwohl; Robert M Genta; Evan S Dellon
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2015-02-24       Impact factor: 11.382

Review 3.  Advances in diagnosis and management of celiac disease.

Authors:  Ciarán P Kelly; Julio C Bai; Edwin Liu; Daniel A Leffler
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 22.682

4.  Decreased risk of celiac disease in patients with Helicobacter pylori colonization.

Authors:  Benjamin Lebwohl; Martin J Blaser; Jonas F Ludvigsson; Peter H R Green; Andrew Rundle; Amnon Sonnenberg; Robert M Genta
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 5.  Microscopic enteritis: Bucharest consensus.

Authors:  Kamran Rostami; David Aldulaimi; Geoffrey Holmes; Matt W Johnson; Marie Robert; Amitabh Srivastava; Jean-François Fléjou; David S Sanders; Umberto Volta; Mohammad H Derakhshan; James J Going; Gabriel Becheanu; Carlo Catassi; Mihai Danciu; Luke Materacki; Kamran Ghafarzadegan; Sauid Ishaq; Mohammad Rostami-Nejad; A Salvador Peña; Gabrio Bassotti; Michael N Marsh; Vincenzo Villanacci
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-03-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 6.  Diagnosing celiac disease: A critical overview.

Authors:  Arzu Ensari; Michael N Marsh
Journal:  Turk J Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.852

7.  The coeliac stomach: gastritis in patients with coeliac disease.

Authors:  B Lebwohl; P H R Green; R M Genta
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2015-05-14       Impact factor: 8.171

8.  Sex and racial disparities in duodenal biopsy to evaluate for celiac disease.

Authors:  Benjamin Lebwohl; Christina A Tennyson; Jennifer L Holub; David A Lieberman; Alfred I Neugut; Peter H R Green
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-06-23       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 9.  Quality improvement in gastroenterology clinical practice.

Authors:  Rakhi Kheraj; Sumeet K Tewani; Gyanprakash Ketwaroo; Daniel A Leffler
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2012-08-16       Impact factor: 11.382

10.  Duodenal Bulb Biopsies Remain Relevant in the Diagnosis of Adult Celiac Disease.

Authors:  Laura A Pace; Sheila E Crowe
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 11.382

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.