| Literature DB >> 31404439 |
Entcho Klenske1, Raja Atreya1, Arndt Hartmann2, Sarah Fischer1, Simon Hirschmann1, Sebastian Zundler1, Marietta Iaccuci3, Markus F Neurath1, Timo Rath1.
Abstract
Background and study aims Apart from mucosal healing as an established treatment goal in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), recent evidence suggests that histologic healing may become another key prognostic parameter in IBD patients. We aimed to evaluate whether magnification endoscopy with optical chromoendoscopy can accurately assess histologic inflammation in IBD patients. Patients and methods In this prospective study, 82 patients with IBD (30 UC, 52 CD) were included. In all patients, magnification endoscopy in conjunction with optical chromoendoscopy was performed and rated on a novel magnification endoscopy score by three independent endoscopists. Targeted biopsies of the imaged areas were obtained and results were compared against two histological scores in UC (Robarts Histopathology Index, RHI; Nancy Histology Index, NHI) and one score in CD (modified Riley index, mRI). Moreover, interobserver agreement was calculated. Results Magnification endoscopy showed strong correlation with histopathologic scoring in both UC (RHI: r = 0.83, NHI: r = 0.78, P < 0.05) and CD (mRI: r = 0.74, P < 0.05) with high accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Further, 25 % of patients with mucosal healing on standard endoscopy showed signs of microinflammation on magnification endoscopy with optical chromoendoscopy, while none of the patients with mucosal and vascular healing under magnification endoscopy with optical chromoendoscopy exhibited microscopic inflammation. Interobserver agreement for grading intestinal inflammation by magnification endoscopy with optical chromoendoscopy was substantial (κ > 0.7). Conclusion Magnification endoscopy in combination with optical chromoendoscopy shows strong correlation with histologic inflammation in patients with IBD. This approach has potential to reduce physical biopsies for monitoring of inflammatory activity in patients with IBD during colonoscopy.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31404439 PMCID: PMC6687476 DOI: 10.1055/a-0953-1334
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Endosc Int Open ISSN: 2196-9736
Demographic and clinical patient characteristics.
| Ulcerative colitis (n = 30) | Crohn’s disease (n = 52) | |
| Age, median (range), years | 47 (20 – 62) | 42 (19 – 72) |
| Male, n (%) | 17 (56.7) | 23 (44.2) |
| Disease duration, mean ± SD (range), years | 10.1 ± 7.4 | 12.4 ± 11.6 |
| Disease extension, n (%) | ||
| Proctitis | 1 (3.3) | |
| Pancolitis | 17 (56.7) | |
| Left sided | 12 (40) | |
| Terminal ileum | 14 (26.9) | |
| Colonic | 10 (19.2) | |
| Ileocolitis | 28 (53.9) | |
| Current medication, n (%) | ||
| None | 0 (0) | 8 (15.4) |
| Mesalazine | 10 (33.3) | 2 (3.8) |
| Azathioprine/methotrexate | 1 (3.3) | 5 (9.6) |
| Anti-TNF | 12 (40) | 24 (46.2) |
| Vedolizumab | 6 (20) | 2 (3.8) |
| Ustekinumab | 4 (7.7) | |
| Combination therapy | 1 (3.3) | 3 (5.8) |
| Steroids | 0 (0) | 4 (7.7) |
| Clinical activity scores, n (%) | ||
| Mayo score | ||
| ≤ 5 | 21 | |
| ≥ 5 | 9 | |
| CDAI | ||
| ≤ 150 | 32 | |
| ≥ 150 | 20 | |
| Endoscopic scores, mean ± SD | ||
| Mayo score | 1.8 ± 1.3 | |
| SES-CD | 8.4 ± 10.9 | |
| Laboratory markers, mean ± SD | ||
| C-reactive protein (mg/L) | 7 ± 7.8 | 9.4 ± 13.5 |
Fig. 1 Flowchart of the included patients 28 .
i-scan OE magnification endoscopy score for UC and CD in the colon 19 .
| Score | Characteristics |
|
| |
| VP Grade 1 | Round vessels surrounding crypts, isolated spiral vessels |
| VP Grade 2 | Crowded/tortuous/serrated vessels |
| VP Grade 3 | Dilated vessels with intramucosal bleeding |
| VP Grade 4 | Destroyed vessels with luminal bleeding |
|
| |
| MP Grade 1 | Round/dilated/absent crypts |
| MP Grade 2 | Round crypts with microerosion |
| MP Grade 3 | Dilated/elongated crypts with erosion |
| MP Grade 4 | Hyperplastic crypts with necrosis and ulcers |
| Overall score | Mucosal + vascular pattern score |
Fig. 2 Mucosal and vascular pattern grading in patients with UC and CD in the colon under magnification endoscopy with i-scan OE. Upper row: Grading of the mucosal pattern was based on a scoring from 1 to 4, as outlined in Table 2 . Lower row: Grading of the vascular pattern was based on a scoring from 1 to 4, as outlined in Table 2 .
i-scan OE magnification endoscopy score for CD in the terminal ileum.
| Score | Characteristics |
|
| |
| VP Grade 1 | No vessels visible or vascular arcade within the villi |
| VP Grade 2 | Spiral/serrated vessels inside the villi |
| VP Grade 3 | Intravillous haemorrhage |
| VP Grade 4 | Intervillous haemorrhage and/or vascular distortion with areal bleeding |
|
| |
| MP Grade 1 | Normal villi |
| MP Grade 2 | Deformed, hypertrophied villi with irregular size, shape and distance |
| MP Grade 3 | Deformed, hypertrophied villi with erosions |
| MP Grade 4 | Deformed, hypertrophied villi with ulcerations and necrosis |
| Overall score | Mucosal + vascular pattern score |
Fig. 3Mucosal and vascular pattern grading in patients with CD in the terminal ileum under magnification endoscopy with i-scan OE. Upper row: Grading of the mucosal pattern was based on a scoring from 1 to 4, as outlined in Table 3 . Lower row: Grading of the vascular pattern was based on a scoring from 1 to 4, as outlined in Table 3 .
Magnification endoscopy scoring in the whole IBD cohort.
| Score | Mucosal pattern | Vascular pattern |
| 1 | 36 | 31 |
| 2 | 12 | 15 |
| 3 | 12 | 25 |
| 4 | 22 | 11 |
Patients with mucosal healing under WLE (n = 32) and their corresponding mucosal and vascular pattern scoring with magnification endoscopy and i-scan OE.
| Score | Mucosal pattern | Vascular pattern |
| 1 | 25 | 24 |
| 2 | 5 | 5 |
| 3 | 2 | 3 |
| 4 | 0 | 0 |
Correlation between magnification endoscopy scoring, histopathological scoring and WLE.
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
| |
| Accuracy, % | 82 | 71 | 57 | 54 |
| Sensitivity, % (95 % CI) | 88.2 (62 – 98) | 76.5 (50 – 92) | 69.2 (39 – 90) | 68 (41 – 88) |
| Specificity, % (95 % CI) | 63.6 (32 – 88) | 63.6 (32 – 88) | 33 (13 – 61) | 33 (11 – 65) |
| Correlation r (95 % CI) | 0.83 (0.66 – 0.92) | 0.78 (0.57 – 0.89) | 0.67 (0.39 – 0.83) | 0.62 (0.32 – 0.82) |
|
| ||||
|
|
| |||
| Accuracy, % | 67 | 55 | ||
| Sensitivity, % (95 % CI) | 76.2 (53 – 91) | 52.2 (31 – 73) | ||
| Specificity, % (95 % CI) | 60.7 (41 – 78) | 57.6 (37 – 76) | ||
| Correlation r (95 % CI) | 0.74 (0.58 – 0.85) | 0.68 (0.49 – 0.81) | ||
ME, magnification endoscopy; RH,: Robarts histological Index 24 ; NH,: Nancy histological Index 25 ; mRI, modified Riley Index 27 ; WLE: white-light endoscopy.