The Clinical Significance of Focally Enhanced Gastritis in Children.
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND:: Focally enhanced gastritis (FEG) was initially described in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but subsequent reports found this to be a nonspecific finding in adults. Initial reports suggest that FEG may be more predictive of IBD in pediatric patients, but this has yet to be confirmed. The aim of our study was to characterize and determine clinical correlates of FEG in pediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS:: Gastric biopsies from pediatric patients who were diagnosed with FEG at a single tertiary care center over a 5-year period were reviewed (5-y cohort study). In a subsequent study, all gastric biopsies from pediatric patients in the single center over a 1-year period were reviewed. Biopsies were reviewed in a blinded manner by 2 pathologists, and histologic data of interest were recorded. Clinical data and follow-up data were recorded from review of the electronic medical records. RESULTS:: Of the 25 patients with FEG in the 5-year cohort study, IBD was present in 19 (76%) patients. Crohn disease (CD) was more common than ulcerative colitis (UC) among these patients (68% vs. 16%). In the 1-year review study with 262 gastric biopsies, FEG was present in 31 (11%) cases. Patients with FEG were significantly more likely to have IBD than non-FEG patients (61.3% vs. 11.6%, P≤0.001). Of the 19 patients with FEG and IBD, 9 patients had CD, 9 patients had UC, and 1 had indeterminate colitis. CONCLUSIONS:: The presence of FEG is highly associated with IBD in pediatric patients. The presence of FEG does not reliably distinguish between patients with CD and those with UC.
SourceAvailable from: Tiago Nunes[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Context and Objectives - Focally enhanced gastritis and macrophage microaggregates are found in the upper gastrointestinal involvement of Crohn’s disease, and may reflect an underlying defective innate immunity. These features, however, are also described in patients with Helicobacter pylori infection. The role of these gastric abnormalities in the diagnosis of Crohn’s disease was assessed in a population with high prevalence of H. pylori infection. Methods - Thirty-seven Crohn’s disease, 26 ulcerative colitis and 30 control patients were included. The H. pylori status was evaluated by the rapid urease test and histology. The presence of focally enhanced gastritis and macrophage microaggregates was recorded. Results - Focally enhanced gastritis was present in 24% of Crohn’s disease patients, 4% of ulcerative colitis patients and 11.5% of controls, presenting an overall sensitivity and specificity for Crohn’s disease of 24% and 88%, respectively. Macrophage microaggregates were found in all groups, but were only detected in ulcerative colitis and controls in association with H. pylori infection, with an overall sensitivity and specificity for Crohn’s disease of 61% and 69%, respectively. In the absence of H. pylori infection, focally enhanced gastritis and macrophage microaggregates were significantly associated with Crohn’s disease (P<0.02 and P = 0.001 respectively). Conclusions - Focally gastritis and macrophage microaggregates are suggestive of Crohn’s disease only in H. pylori-negative specimens.Arquivos de Gastroenterologia 10/2014; 51(4). DOI:10.1590/S0004-28032014000400003
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Distinction between Crohn's disease of the colon-rectum and ulcerative colitis or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) type unclassified can be of pivotal importance for a tailored clinical management, as each entity often involves specific therapeutic strategies and prognosis. Nonetheless, no gold standard is available and the uncertainty of diagnosis may frequently lead to misclassification or repeated examinations. Hence, we have performed a literature search to address the problem of differential diagnosis in IBD colitis, revised current and emerging diagnostic tools and refined disease classification strategies. Nowadays, the differential diagnosis is an untangled issue, and the proper diagnosis cannot be reached in up to 10% of patients presenting with IBD colitis. This topic is receiving emerging attention, as medical therapies, surgical approaches and leading prognostic outcomes require more and more disease-specific strategies in IBD patients. The optimization of standard diagnostic approaches based on clinical features, biomarkers, radiology, endoscopy and histopathology appears to provide only marginal benefits. Conversely, emerging diagnostic techniques in the field of gastrointestinal endoscopy, molecular pathology, genetics, epigenetics, metabolomics and proteomics have already shown promising results. Novel advanced endoscopic imaging techniques and biomarkers can shed new light for the differential diagnosis of IBD, better reflecting diverse disease behaviors based on specific pathogenic pathways.World Journal of Gastroenterology 01/2015; 21(1):21-46. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v21.i1.21 · 2.43 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The histologic finding of chronic inflammation in an endoscopic mucosal biopsy from the stomach (chronic gastritis) is very common and usually reflects the presence of H. pylori infection. However, infectious organisms are not always present in biopsy material and some cases of chronic gastritis do not result from H. pylori infection. Thus, the differential diagnosis of this finding is an important one for pathologists to keep in mind. This review presents the three most common and clinically significant causes of chronic, noninfectious gastritis, namely autoimmune atrophic gastritis, lymphocytic gastritis, and gastric involvement in the setting of inflammatory bowel disease, especially Crohn disease. For each entity, a brief discussion of its etiology and pathogenesis, a review of the clinical and endoscopic features, and a description of the microscopic findings are presented in the context of the differential diagnosis of chronic gastritis with emphasis on helpful histopathologic hints and long-term sequelae.Seminars in Diagnostic Pathology 07/2014; 31(4):314–317. DOI:10.1053/j.semdp.2014.02.008 · 1.80 Impact Factor