Tag Archives: biopsy

When To Take Fewer Biopsies With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Posted on by

A Godat et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2024: 22: 1528-1530. Eosinophil Distribution in Eosinophilic Esophagitis and its Impact on Disease Activity and Response to Treatment

In this post hoc analysis of the EOS-1 and EOS-2 trials with 263 adult patients, the authors analyzed eosinophil distribution and impact on treatment. Key findings;

  • Peak eosinophil count was highest in the distal esophagus (median 166 eos/mm2) followed by mid esophagus (142) and then proximal esophagus (113). 46% of patients had highest peak eosinophil count in the distal esophagus, 33% in the mid esophagus, and 21% of patients in the proximal esophagus
  • Diagnosis: a biopsy protocol using only distal esophagus would have missed EoE diagnosis in only 13 (4.9%) of patients
  • Remission rates stratified by histologic categories were not statistically different base on disease location: 73% distal esophagus, 76% mid esophagus, 64% proximal esophagus, and 64% diffuse esophageal disease
  • None of the following factors affected treatment outcome: histologic location category, histologic disease severity (peak eos count) and atopic status. For example, treatment failure occurred in 37% without atopy and 30% with atopy

My take: In this study population, separate evaluation of biopsies by location modestly increased the diagnostic yield at baseline. Thus, additional biopsies at disease onset is a good idea. However, the actual distribution of disease activity did not seem to help provide any insight into therapeutic response (to budesonide). Practical implications are that fewer biopsies on follow-up endoscopy may be reasonable to help determine a treatment response.

Related blog posts.

“To biopsy or not to biopsy” –that is the question (for Celiac disease)

Posted on by

First off -thanks to Ben Gold for the following reference and the blog title as well.

  • CM Trovato et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 1485-89.

In this retrospective study (alluded to in a previous post:Celiac Update September 2015 | gutsandgrowth), the researchers examined whether “biopsy-sparing” protocols for symptomatic children with high titers of serum anti-transglutaminase (anti-TTG) antibody levels (>10 times upper limit of normal [ULN]) would be suitable for asymptomatic patients.

Background: In 2012, the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) published guidelines that it is possible to omit endoscopic biopsies for celiac disease if patients older than 2 years of age had high anti-TTG titers (>10 times ULN), positivity for EMA, compatible HLA DQ2 or HLA DQ8 and were symptomatic.

Findings:

  • Among 196 patients, the 40 who were asymptomatic had severe Marsh lesions (3a, 3b, or 3c) in 92% compared with 91% of 156 who were symptomatic. In both groups, the remaining patients had either Marsh 1 or 2 lesions.
  • 94.4% of patients had improved serology during followup along with symptomatic improvement (in those with symptoms)

Bottomline:  Whether symptomatic or not, those with high antiTTG titers who meet all of the other ESPGHAN criteria have a very high probability of celiac disease.

Briefly noted: K Marild et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 1475-84. This study, based on a large prospective Norwegian cohort (72,921 children) that frequent infections (>10) in the first 18 months of life increased the risk of celiac disease with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.32 (highest infection quartile compared to lowest infection quartile).  However, alternative explanations, including surveillance bias and reverse causation, cannot be excluded.

Related blog posts:

 

Are Biopsies Needed with a Normal-appearing Colonoscopy?

Posted on by

“Colonoscopy in children routinely includes the practice of obtaining multiple biopsy samples even in the absence of gross mucosal abnormalities.”  This is the beginning of a recent report (JPGN 2014; 58: 773-78) which shows good agreement between endoscopic and histologic findings in a retrospective study of 390 colonoscopies.

Key findings:

  • “A known diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease was a strong predictor of abnormal histology (OR 6.4 P<0.0001)”
  • 20 of 172 patients with a reportedly normal-appearing colonic mucosa had abnormal histology.  8 had a known diagnosis of IBD, 4 had symptoms/bloodwork highly suspicious for IBD, and another 3 were immunosuppressed.
  • The agreement rate (normal vs. abnormal) between pathologist and endoscopist was 84% with most of the disagreement when the endoscopist reported an abnormal finding whereas the pathologist reported normal histology.  This occurred in 11% of colonoscopies.

The authors “believe our data support the use of a combination of endoscopic appearance and evidence-based risk stratification to…reduce the number of biopsies obtained.”  “The symptom of abdominal pain as a primary indication for performing the procedure was an extremely strong negative predictor of histopathology. ”

Take-home message: If the colon appears normal and there is no prior evidence of IBD/along with reassuring laboratory studies, taking fewer biopsies is appropriate with colonoscopy in children.

Disclaimer: These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications/diets (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician/nutritionist.  Endoscopy decisions should be determined by your physician. This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.