Lea I Kredel1, Pamela Mundt1,2, Linda van Riesen1,3, Korinna Jöhrens4, Jörg Hofmann5, Christoph Loddenkemper6, Britta Siegmund1, Jan C Preiß7,8. 1. Medizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Gastroenterologie, Infektiologie und Rheumatologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203, Berlin, Germany. 2. Praxis Jessen + Kollegen, Akademische Lehrpraxis der Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 3. Klinik für Innere Medizin - Schwerpunkt Gastroenterologie, DRK Kliniken Westend, Berlin, Germany. 4. Institut für Pathologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany. 5. Institut für Virologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany. 6. Pathotres Gemeinschaftspraxis für Pathologie, Berlin, Germany. 7. Medizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Gastroenterologie, Infektiologie und Rheumatologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203, Berlin, Germany. jan.preiss@charite.de. 8. Klinik für Innere Medizin - Gastroenterologie, Diabetologie und Hepatologie, Vivantes Klinikum Neukölln, Berlin, Germany. jan.preiss@charite.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The optimal method for detecting CMV colitis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has not been established. We wanted to investigate which diagnostic test would be most accurate when defining CMV colitis rather by the further clinical course than by using another diagnostic modality. METHODS: All consecutive patients with moderately or severely active IBD who had been tested for CMV by PCR, histology, or antigenemia assay at the two campuses CBF and CCM of the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin between September 2006 and September 2009 were included in this retrospective study. During that time, in patients with a positive CMV test, immunosuppressive treatment of any kind was immediately reduced and antiviral treatment was started. This allowed identifying patients who responded to antiviral treatment and those who only responded to later escalation of immunosuppressive therapy. RESULTS: One hundred and nine patients were identified, out of whom nine were considered to have clinically relevant CMV colitis. Sensitivity and specificity were 1 and 0.94 for CMV PCR and 0.5 and 1 for pp65 antigen immunofluorescence assay from peripheral blood, 0.67 and 0.98 for immunohistochemistry, and 0.17 and 0.98 for hematoxylin-eosin staining. When using absence of leukocytosis, splenomegaly, and steroid refractory disease as clinical parameters to test for CMV colitis, blood CMV PCR and immunohistochemistry were able to exclude CMV colitis in negative patients with a 75% likelihood of positive patients to have clinically relevant CMV colitis. CONCLUSIONS: Blood-based CMV PCR together with simple clinical parameters can exclude clinically relevant CMV colitis at a high specificity.
PURPOSE: The optimal method for detecting CMV colitis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has not been established. We wanted to investigate which diagnostic test would be most accurate when defining CMV colitis rather by the further clinical course than by using another diagnostic modality. METHODS: All consecutive patients with moderately or severely active IBD who had been tested for CMV by PCR, histology, or antigenemia assay at the two campuses CBF and CCM of the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin between September 2006 and September 2009 were included in this retrospective study. During that time, in patients with a positive CMV test, immunosuppressive treatment of any kind was immediately reduced and antiviral treatment was started. This allowed identifying patients who responded to antiviral treatment and those who only responded to later escalation of immunosuppressive therapy. RESULTS: One hundred and nine patients were identified, out of whom nine were considered to have clinically relevant CMV colitis. Sensitivity and specificity were 1 and 0.94 for CMV PCR and 0.5 and 1 for pp65 antigen immunofluorescence assay from peripheral blood, 0.67 and 0.98 for immunohistochemistry, and 0.17 and 0.98 for hematoxylin-eosin staining. When using absence of leukocytosis, splenomegaly, and steroid refractory disease as clinical parameters to test for CMV colitis, blood CMV PCR and immunohistochemistry were able to exclude CMV colitis in negative patients with a 75% likelihood of positive patients to have clinically relevant CMV colitis. CONCLUSIONS: Blood-based CMV PCR together with simple clinical parameters can exclude clinically relevant CMV colitis at a high specificity.