Stephen Ip1, Vladimir Marquez2, David F Schaeffer3, Fergal Donnellan2. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, 5th Floor, 2775 Laurel Street, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada. stephen.ip@alumni.ubc.ca. 2. Division of Gastroenterology, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, 5th Floor, 2775 Laurel Street, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada. 3. Department of Anatomical Pathology, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation that frequently affects the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. The best biopsy sites to establish the diagnosis have not been clearly established. AIMS: To determine the best sites for obtaining biopsies in evaluating GI GVHD. METHODS: All cases of biopsy-proven GI GVHD (GVHD+) were isolated from a pathology database over a 2-year period at a single tertiary center (n = 46). Demographic, clinical, and endoscopic data were extracted. For comparison, 46 consecutive GVHD-negative cases (GVHD-) were obtained. Sensitivities in diagnosing GVHD in the upper and lower GI tract were calculated. RESULTS: In the GVHD- group, they were commonly investigated with an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) (60 vs. 22 % in the GVHD+ group, p < 0.01), while a colonoscopy (CLN) was commonly performed in the GVHD+ group (33 vs. 12 %, p = 0.02). Among the GVHD + patients, for EGDs, the sensitivity was highest for duodenal biopsies at 89 %. For flexible sigmoidoscopies (FSs) and CLNs, the sensitivities among all sites were similar (85 % agreement, kappa 0.58, p = 0.01). There were no cases in which GVHD was diagnosed in the right side of the colon without a positive biopsy in the left side of the colon. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of GI GVHD patients, duodenum biopsies produced the highest yield in diagnosing GVHD when compared to other sites of the upper GI tract. Sensitivities were similar among all sites on lower endoscopies, suggesting that a FS is sufficient for diagnosing GVHD in suspected patients with diarrhea.
BACKGROUND:Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation that frequently affects the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. The best biopsy sites to establish the diagnosis have not been clearly established. AIMS: To determine the best sites for obtaining biopsies in evaluating GI GVHD. METHODS: All cases of biopsy-proven GI GVHD (GVHD+) were isolated from a pathology database over a 2-year period at a single tertiary center (n = 46). Demographic, clinical, and endoscopic data were extracted. For comparison, 46 consecutive GVHD-negative cases (GVHD-) were obtained. Sensitivities in diagnosing GVHD in the upper and lower GI tract were calculated. RESULTS: In the GVHD- group, they were commonly investigated with an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) (60 vs. 22 % in the GVHD+ group, p < 0.01), while a colonoscopy (CLN) was commonly performed in the GVHD+ group (33 vs. 12 %, p = 0.02). Among the GVHD + patients, for EGDs, the sensitivity was highest for duodenal biopsies at 89 %. For flexible sigmoidoscopies (FSs) and CLNs, the sensitivities among all sites were similar (85 % agreement, kappa 0.58, p = 0.01). There were no cases in which GVHD was diagnosed in the right side of the colon without a positive biopsy in the left side of the colon. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of GI GVHDpatients, duodenum biopsies produced the highest yield in diagnosing GVHD when compared to other sites of the upper GI tract. Sensitivities were similar among all sites on lower endoscopies, suggesting that a FS is sufficient for diagnosing GVHD in suspected patients with diarrhea.
Authors: S Oomori; S Takagi; T Kikuchi; K Utsunomiya; H Yokoyama; K Negoro; Y Tohmiya; H Aihara; M Yamada; S Takahashi; J Kameoka; Y Kinouchi; T Shimosegawa Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Kody R Crowell; Raza A Patel; Mark Fluchel; Amy Lowichik; Staci Bryson; John F Pohl Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2013-06-14 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: G J Cox; S M Matsui; R S Lo; M Hinds; R A Bowden; R C Hackman; W G Meyer; M Mori; P I Tarr; L S Oshiro Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 1994-11 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: W Kreisel; M Dahlberg; H Bertz; J Harder; K Potthoff; P Deibert; A Schmitt-Graeff; J Finke Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2011-06-27 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Diana M Cardona; Claire J Detweiler; Michael J Shealy; Anthony D Sung; Daniel M Wild; Martin H Poleski; Bryan L Balmadrid; Constance T Cirrincione; David N Howell; Keith M Sullivan Journal: Arch Pathol Lab Med Date: 2018-04-26 Impact factor: 5.534
Authors: Andreas Kreft; Katrin Hippe; Eva Maria Wagner-Drouet; Isabelle Ries; Arne Kandulski; Maike Büttner-Herold; Helmut Neumann; Daniela Weber; Ernst Holler; Mario Schindeldecker Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-08-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sarah Nikiforow; Tao Wang; Michael Hemmer; Stephen Spellman; Görgün Akpek; Joseph H Antin; Sung Won Choi; Yoshihiro Inamoto; Hanna J Khoury; Margaret MacMillan; David I Marks; Ken Meehan; Hideki Nakasone; Taiga Nishihori; Richard Olsson; Sophie Paczesny; Donna Przepiorka; Vijay Reddy; Ran Reshef; Hélène Schoemans; Ned Waller; Daniel Weisdorf; Baldeep Wirk; Mary Horowitz; Amin Alousi; Daniel Couriel; Joseph Pidala; Mukta Arora; Corey Cutler Journal: Haematologica Date: 2018-08-03 Impact factor: 9.941