Dataset Information

Clinical relevance of endoscopic peri-appendiceal red patch in ulcerative colitis patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Increasing evidence is suggesting appendectomy as an alternative treatment for ulcerative colitis (UC), especially in case of histological appendiceal inflammation. Therefore, preoperative identification of appendiceal inflammation could be beneficial. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of peri-appendiceal red patch (PARP) on colonoscopy. In addition, prognostic relevance of PARP for disease course and its predictive value for histological appendiceal inflammation in patients undergoing appendectomy was assessed.

Methods

UC patients undergoing colonoscopy in 2014/2015 were included to determine PARP-prevalence in a cross-sectional study. Findings were correlated to patient and disease characteristics, upscaling of treatment and colectomy rates after cross-sectional colonoscopy. In patients undergoing appendiceal resection, histopathological inflammation was assessed using the Robarts Histopathology Index (RHI).

Results

In total, 249 patients were included of which 17.7% (44/249) had a PARP. Patients with PARP were significantly younger with a shorter disease course. The majority of patients with PARP (61.4%) was in endoscopic remission. Patients with PARP required more upscaling of medical therapy (81.8% vs. 58.0%, p < 0.01), and more PARP patients underwent colectomy (13.6% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.04). Patients with PARP had a higher median RHI in resection specimens (14 vs. 7, p < 0.01).

Conclusion

PARP was present during colonoscopy regardless disease activity and was predominantly found in UC patients with younger age and shorter disease duration. PARP patients had a more severe course of UC, and in case of appendectomy, more severe histopathological appendiceal inflammation. Appendectomy as an experimental therapy for UC has been suggested to be predominantly effective in UC patients with appendiceal inflammation. This study demonstrates that presence of a PARP on colonoscopy predicts appendiceal inflammation. After consensus has been reached on the therapeutic effect of appendectomy, assessing PARP presence during colonoscopy could therefore contribute to identifying patients most likely to respond.

SUBMITTER: Reijntjes MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9244917 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe significance of endoscopic evaluation in the diagnosis and management of ulcerative colitis (UC) has been widely recognized. Over the years, scholars have established several endoscopic scores. Herein, we assessed the clinical application value of the Mayo Endoscopic Subscore (Mayo ES), the Degree of Ulcerative Colitis Burden of Luminal Inflammation (DUBLIN) score, and the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (UCEIS) score in UC patients, by comparing their correlation with disease activity and their predictive potential for treatment response and clinical outcomes.MethodsUC patients hospitalized from September 2015 to September 2019 were retrospectively analysed. We employed Spearman's rank correlation coefficient to assess the linear association of the assessed endoscopic scores with the clinical parameters. The receiver-operating characteristic curve was applied to evaluate the predictive capabilities of the endoscopic scores for treatment escalation and 1-year readmission.ResultsA total of 178 patients were enrolled; most of them (82%) suffered moderate or severe colitis. Among them, 48 (27%) patients received treatment escalation and 59 (33%) were readmitted within 1 year. The DUBLIN and UCEIS scores demonstrated higher correlations with clinical parameters than the Mayo ES. The DUBLIN scores significantly differed between patients with mild, moderate, and severe colitis (all P < 0.001). The UCEIS scores demonstrated the best predictabilities for treatment escalation and 1-year readmission with an area under the curve of 0.88 and 0.75, respectively. Compared to the UCEIS and DUBLIN scores, the predictive capabilities of the Mayo ES for treatment escalation (both P < 0.001) and 1-year readmission (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002, respectively) were lower. The UCEIS scores exhibited a significant difference between the steroid-responsive group and the steroid-dependent or steroid-refractory group (both P < 0.001), while no significant differences in the Mayo ES and DUBLIN scores were found among the three groups (both P > 0.05).ConclusionThis study demonstrates that both the DUBLIN and UCEIS scores outperform the Mayo ES in assessing disease severity and predicting treatment response and clinical outcomes in UC patients.

Project description:BackgroundVariability in endoscopic assessment necessitates rigorous investigation of descriptors for scoring severity of ulcerative colitis (UC).ObjectiveTo evaluate variation in the overall endoscopic assessment of severity, the intra- and interindividual variation of descriptive terms and to create an Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity which could be validated.DesignA two-phase study used a library of 670 video sigmoidoscopies from patients with Mayo Clinic scores 0-11, supplemented by 10 videos from five people without UC and five hospitalised patients with acute severe UC. In phase 1, each of 10 investigators viewed 16/24 videos to assess agreement on the Baron score with a central reader and agreed definitions of 10 endoscopic descriptors. In phase 2, each of 30 different investigators rated 25/60 different videos for the descriptors and assessed overall severity on a 0-100 visual analogue scale. κ Statistics tested inter- and intraobserver variability for each descriptor. A general linear mixed regression model based on logit link and β distribution of variance was used to predict overall endoscopic severity from descriptors.ResultsThere was 76% agreement for 'severe', but 27% agreement for 'normal' appearances between phase I investigators and the central reader. In phase 2, weighted κ values ranged from 0.34 to 0.65 and 0.30 to 0.45 within and between observers for the 10 descriptors. The final model incorporated vascular pattern, (normal/patchy/complete obliteration) bleeding (none/mucosal/luminal mild/luminal moderate or severe), erosions and ulcers (none/erosions/superficial/deep), each with precise definitions, which explained 90% of the variance (pR(2), Akaike Information Criterion) in the overall assessment of endoscopic severity, predictions varying from 4 to 93 on a 100-point scale (from normal to worst endoscopic severity).ConclusionThe Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity accurately predicts overall assessment of endoscopic severity of UC. Validity and responsiveness need further testing before it can be applied as an outcome measure in clinical trials or clinical practice.

Project description:Background:Vedolizumab inhibits ?4?7-mediated lymphocyte trafficking and is effective in ulcerative colitis (UC). This study evaluated drug and biomarker concentrations and patient outcomes during vedolizumab treatment in UC. Methods:Prospectively scored maintenance clinical (26.5 weeks; interquartile range [IQR], 16.3-37.0 weeks) and endoscopic (23.5 weeks; IQR, 16.8-35.6 weeks) outcomes were compared with serum vedolizumab concentrations, antivedolizumab antibodies, and serum biomarkers at baseline and weeks 2, 6, 14, and 26. A linear mixed-effects model compared biomarker trajectories over time between clinical and endoscopic remitters and nonremitters. Results:Thirty-two patients were included. Soluble (s)-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-?, s-?4?7, s-mucosal addressin cell adhesion molecule (s-MAdCAM-1), and s-amyloid A (s-AA) significantly changed with treatment. A linear mixed-effects model demonstrated that s-?4?7 (P = 0.044) increased and s-MAdCAM-1 (P = 0.006) and s-vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (s-VCAM-1, P = 0.001) decreased more rapidly in patients achieving clinical remission in maintenance. S-MAdCAM-1 (P = 0.005), s-intracellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1; P = 0.014), s-VCAM-1 (P < 0.001), and s-TNF (P = 0.052) decreased more rapidly in endoscopic remitters. In clinical remitters, higher week 14 (20.3 ng/mL vs 6.0 ng/mL; P = 0.013) and week 26 (14.1 ng/mL vs 8.6 ng/mL; P = 0.05) s-?4?7 were observed. In endoscopic remitters, week 2 (6.7 pg/mL vs 17.8 pg/mL; P = 0.038) and week 6 (3.9 pg/mL vs 15.6 pg/mL; P = 0.005) s-TNF and week 14 s-VCAM (589.1 ng/mL vs 746.0 ng/mL; P = 0.05) were lower. Conclusion:Serum biomarkers were associated with outcomes in vedolizumab-treated UC patients. s-?4?7 increased, whereas s-MAdCAM-1, s-VCAM-1, s-ICAM-1, and s-TNF decreased more rapidly in remitters. At individual time points, induction s-TNF and maintenance s-VCAM-1 concentrations were lower, whereas maintenance s-?4?7 concentrations were higher in remitters.