AIM: To determine the difference in clinical outcome between ulcerative colitis (UC) patients with Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES) 0 and those with MES 1. METHODS: UC patients with sustained clinical remission of 6 mo or more at the time of colonoscopy were examined for clinical outcomes and the hazard ratios of clinical relapse according to MES. Parameters, including blood tests, to identify predictive factors for MES 0 and slight endoscopic recurrence in clinically stable patients were assessed. Moreover, a receiver operating characteristic curve was generated, and the area under the curve was calculated to indicate the utility of the parameters for the division between complete and partial mucosal healing. All P values were two-sided and considered significant when less than 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 183 patients with clinical remission were examined. Patients with MES 0 (complete mucosal healing: n = 80, 44%) were much less likely to relapse than those with MES 1 (partial mucosal healing: n = 89, 48%) (P < 0.0001, log-rank test), and the hazard ratio of risk of relapse in patients with MES 1 vs MES 0 was 8.17 (95%CI: 4.19-17.96, P < 0.0001). The platelet count (PLT) < 26 × 10(4)/μL was an independent predictive factor for complete mucosal healing (OR = 4.1, 95%CI: 2.15-7.99). Among patients with MES 0 at the initial colonoscopy, patients of whom colonoscopy findings shifted to MES 1 showed significant increases in PLT compared to those who maintained MES 0 (3.8 × 10(4)/μL vs -0.6 × 10(4)/μL, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The relapse rate differed greatly between patients with complete and partial mucosal healing. A shift from complete to partial healing in clinically stable UC patients can be predicted by monitoring PLT.
AIM: To determine the difference in clinical outcome between ulcerative colitis (UC) patients with Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES) 0 and those with MES 1. METHODS: UC patients with sustained clinical remission of 6 mo or more at the time of colonoscopy were examined for clinical outcomes and the hazard ratios of clinical relapse according to MES. Parameters, including blood tests, to identify predictive factors for MES 0 and slight endoscopic recurrence in clinically stable patients were assessed. Moreover, a receiver operating characteristic curve was generated, and the area under the curve was calculated to indicate the utility of the parameters for the division between complete and partial mucosal healing. All P values were two-sided and considered significant when less than 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 183 patients with clinical remission were examined. Patients with MES 0 (complete mucosal healing: n = 80, 44%) were much less likely to relapse than those with MES 1 (partial mucosal healing: n = 89, 48%) (P < 0.0001, log-rank test), and the hazard ratio of risk of relapse in patients with MES 1 vs MES 0 was 8.17 (95%CI: 4.19-17.96, P < 0.0001). The platelet count (PLT) < 26 × 10(4)/μL was an independent predictive factor for complete mucosal healing (OR = 4.1, 95%CI: 2.15-7.99). Among patients with MES 0 at the initial colonoscopy, patients of whom colonoscopy findings shifted to MES 1 showed significant increases in PLT compared to those who maintained MES 0 (3.8 × 10(4)/μL vs -0.6 × 10(4)/μL, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The relapse rate differed greatly between patients with complete and partial mucosal healing. A shift from complete to partial healing in clinically stable UC patients can be predicted by monitoring PLT.
Entities:
Keywords:
Mayo endoscopic subscore; Mucosal healing; Platelet count; Ulcerative colitis
Authors: Hasan Kayahan; Mesut Akarsu; Mehmet Ali Ozcan; Serdal Demir; Halil Ates; Belkis Unsal; Hale Akpinar Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2007-06-05 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: C D Garlichs; S Eskafi; D Raaz; A Schmidt; J Ludwig; M Herrmann; L Klinghammer; W G Daniel; A Schmeisser Journal: Heart Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Walter Reinisch; William J Sandborn; Daniel W Hommes; Geert D'Haens; Stephen Hanauer; Stefan Schreiber; Remo Panaccione; Richard N Fedorak; Mary Beth Tighe; Bidan Huang; Wendy Kampman; Andreas Lazar; Roopal Thakkar Journal: Gut Date: 2011-01-05 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Dan Turner; Catharine M Walsh; A Hillary Steinhart; Anne M Griffiths Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2006-12-04 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Laura Rosenberg; Garrett O Lawlor; Talia Zenlea; Jeffrey D Goldsmith; Anne Gifford; Kenneth R Falchuk; Jacqueline L Wolf; Adam S Cheifetz; Simon C Robson; Alan C Moss Journal: Inflamm Bowel Dis Date: 2013 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 5.325
Authors: Fabian Schnitzler; Herma Fidder; Marc Ferrante; Maja Noman; Ingrid Arijs; Gert Van Assche; Ilse Hoffman; Kristel Van Steen; Séverine Vermeire; Paul Rutgeerts Journal: Inflamm Bowel Dis Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 5.325
Authors: Robert Battat; Parambir S Dulai; Christopher Ma; Vipul Jairath; Brian G Feagan; William J Sandborn; Reena Khanna Journal: Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol Date: 2020-01-04
Authors: Wing Yan Mak; Anthony Buisson; Michael J Andersen; Donald Lei; Joel Pekow; Russell D Cohen; Stacy A Kahn; Bruno Pereira; David T Rubin Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2018-02-22 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Daniël R Hoekman; Kay Diederen; Bart G P Koot; Merit M Tabbers; Angelika Kindermann; Marc A Benninga Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2016-08-29 Impact factor: 3.183