Indian journal of pathology & microbiology · 2025
A Pan-Indian survey on the interpretation of intestinal biopsies in inflammatory bowel disease, and differentiating intestinal tuberculosis and Crohn's disease from a pathologist's perspective.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Das Prasenjit, Akhtar Sagir, Bhowmik Subham, Mehra Lalita, Sakhuja Puja, Vaiphei Kim, Pulimood Anna, Tiwari Ashok, Kumari Niraj, Amarapurkar Anjali D, Banerjee Mala, Paulose Roopa Rachel, Katti Sanjeev Vasudev, Sekaran Anuradha, Yadav Rajni, Dutta Rimlee, Singh Aminder, Hussain Nuzhat, Nada Ritambhra, Kedia Saurabh, Misra Vatsala, Gupta Siddhartha Datta, Makharia Govind K, Nijhawan Sandeep, Ahuja Vineet
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The incidence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is rising in India, particularly that of Crohn's disease (CD). Histological examination is essential for disease evaluation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This national survey invited registered members of the Indian Association of Pathologists and Microbiologists who handle intestinal biopsies for IBD diagnosis to respond to 41 questions divided into two segments. The questions aimed to assess the sampling protocol, processing, and histological interpretation for IBD diagnosis, disease classification, and differentiation between CD and intestinal tuberculosis (iTB). The SurveyMonkey platform was used.
RESULTS: Within the given period of 2 weeks, a total of 287 responses were received. There was considerable variability in the sampling protocols, processing methods, and histological criteria used for IBD diagnosis, disease classification, and differentiating between IBD and non-IBD-type colitis. Also, there was nonuniformity of the histological grading system and terminologies used. Image-based questions were also included to examine the histological diagnoses and wide heterogeneity was observed. The histological criteria used to differentiate between CD and iTB were heterogeneous in up to 20-50% of the responses received. Pathologists with over 10 years of experience were more methodical in their approach, routinely performed histological grading on biopsies, and correctly identified IBD changes in the provided images compared to less experienced pathologists ( P = 0.23 and P = 0.016, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: This pan-India survey offers a snapshot of the heterogeneous practices currently followed by pathologists and highlights the need for uniformity in pathology practices to improve outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This national survey invited registered members of the Indian Association of Pathologists and Microbiologists who handle intestinal biopsies for IBD diagnosis to respond to 41 questions divided into two segments. The questions aimed to assess the sampling protocol, processing, and histological interpretation for IBD diagnosis, disease classification, and differentiation between CD and intestinal tuberculosis (iTB). The SurveyMonkey platform was used.
RESULTS: Within the given period of 2 weeks, a total of 287 responses were received. There was considerable variability in the sampling protocols, processing methods, and histological criteria used for IBD diagnosis, disease classification, and differentiating between IBD and non-IBD-type colitis. Also, there was nonuniformity of the histological grading system and terminologies used. Image-based questions were also included to examine the histological diagnoses and wide heterogeneity was observed. The histological criteria used to differentiate between CD and iTB were heterogeneous in up to 20-50% of the responses received. Pathologists with over 10 years of experience were more methodical in their approach, routinely performed histological grading on biopsies, and correctly identified IBD changes in the provided images compared to less experienced pathologists ( P = 0.23 and P = 0.016, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: This pan-India survey offers a snapshot of the heterogeneous practices currently followed by pathologists and highlights the need for uniformity in pathology practices to improve outcomes.