Journal of clinical gastroenterology · 2016
Celiac Disease and Double-Balloon Enteroscopy: What Can We Achieve?: The Experience of 2 European Tertiary Referral Centers.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Tomba Carolina, Sidhu Reena, Sanders David S, Mooney Peter D, Branchi Federica, Locatelli Martina, Roncoroni Leda, Conte Dario, Bardella Maria T, Elli Luca
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Indications to double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) are not standardized in celiac disease (CD).
GOALS: To evaluate the clinical usefulness of DBE in complicated CD.
STUDY: DBE findings in celiac patients with suspected small bowel (SB) complications were retrospectively evaluated in 2 tertiary referral centers (Milan and Sheffield). Demographic data of the studied cohort were compared with a database of 1000 noncomplicated CD patients.
RESULTS: Twenty-four CD cases (12 males, P=0.01 vs. controls) were reviewed. Mean age at CD diagnosis (y±SD) was 37±20 versus 27±18 and at SB evaluation 47±15 versus 38±13 (P<0.01 compared with controls). Indications for DBE were refractory CD (#9), gastrointestinal symptoms (#6), severe iron-deficiency anemia (#6), and long standing poor dietary adherence (#3). Two jejunal adenocarcinomas and an ileal neuroendocrine tumor were detected in presence of iron-deficiency anemia. Three type I and 3 type II refractory CD patients showed jejunal ulcerations; 2 of type II presented small white raised patches. Patchy atrophy was observed in nonadherent patients and in 2 on a gluten-free diet for a short time. Therapy was planned in 33% of patients after DBE. No adverse events were detected at follow-up [21 mo (range, 0 to 60 mo)].
CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest international study on the outcomes of DBE in CD demonstrating its usefulness to exclude/confirm malignant or premalignant conditions, associated with even minor lesions. Studies are needed to understand the clinical relevance of the SB endoscopic features and to optimize DBE indications.
GOALS: To evaluate the clinical usefulness of DBE in complicated CD.
STUDY: DBE findings in celiac patients with suspected small bowel (SB) complications were retrospectively evaluated in 2 tertiary referral centers (Milan and Sheffield). Demographic data of the studied cohort were compared with a database of 1000 noncomplicated CD patients.
RESULTS: Twenty-four CD cases (12 males, P=0.01 vs. controls) were reviewed. Mean age at CD diagnosis (y±SD) was 37±20 versus 27±18 and at SB evaluation 47±15 versus 38±13 (P<0.01 compared with controls). Indications for DBE were refractory CD (#9), gastrointestinal symptoms (#6), severe iron-deficiency anemia (#6), and long standing poor dietary adherence (#3). Two jejunal adenocarcinomas and an ileal neuroendocrine tumor were detected in presence of iron-deficiency anemia. Three type I and 3 type II refractory CD patients showed jejunal ulcerations; 2 of type II presented small white raised patches. Patchy atrophy was observed in nonadherent patients and in 2 on a gluten-free diet for a short time. Therapy was planned in 33% of patients after DBE. No adverse events were detected at follow-up [21 mo (range, 0 to 60 mo)].
CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest international study on the outcomes of DBE in CD demonstrating its usefulness to exclude/confirm malignant or premalignant conditions, associated with even minor lesions. Studies are needed to understand the clinical relevance of the SB endoscopic features and to optimize DBE indications.