World journal of gastroenterology · 2006
Endoscopic findings and pathologic characteristics of gastric eosinophilic granuloma: a report of 18 patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Song Wen-Chong, Yu Jie-Ping, Shen Lei, Xia Hong, Luo He-Sheng
Аннотация
AIM: To investigate the endoscopic findings and patholo-gic characteristics of gastric eosinophilic granuloma (GEG).
METHODS: A retrospective study of 18 cases of gastric eosinophilic granulomas was conducted. Gastroscopy was performed and all specimens of biopsies were stained by HE and observed under light microscopy.
RESULTS: Ulcer was the most frequent endoscopic appearance. The others included deformed pylorus and/or duodenal bulb, esophagitis, mucous hyperemia and/or mucosal erosion. Eosinophilic cell infiltration and generous hyperplasia of arterioles, venules and lymph vessels were found in the lesions of the patients. Interstitium had massive eosinophilic infiltrates and was made up of collagen fibers and fibroblasts. Lymphoid follicles were revealed in some sections of biopsies.
CONCLUSION: GEG is lack of specific symptoms and physical signs. It can be misdiagnosed as gastric ulcer in most cases before biopsies. Endoscopy and endoscopic multiple deep biopsies in suspected areas are indispensable for correct diagnosis of GEG.
METHODS: A retrospective study of 18 cases of gastric eosinophilic granulomas was conducted. Gastroscopy was performed and all specimens of biopsies were stained by HE and observed under light microscopy.
RESULTS: Ulcer was the most frequent endoscopic appearance. The others included deformed pylorus and/or duodenal bulb, esophagitis, mucous hyperemia and/or mucosal erosion. Eosinophilic cell infiltration and generous hyperplasia of arterioles, venules and lymph vessels were found in the lesions of the patients. Interstitium had massive eosinophilic infiltrates and was made up of collagen fibers and fibroblasts. Lymphoid follicles were revealed in some sections of biopsies.
CONCLUSION: GEG is lack of specific symptoms and physical signs. It can be misdiagnosed as gastric ulcer in most cases before biopsies. Endoscopy and endoscopic multiple deep biopsies in suspected areas are indispensable for correct diagnosis of GEG.