Histopathology Scoring Systems of Stenosis Associated With Small Bowel Crohn’s Disease: A Systematic Review
Stenosis is a common complication of Crohn’s disease (CD) that has no effective medical therapy. Development of antifibrotic agents will require testing in randomized controlled trials. Computed tomography enterography- and magnetic resonance enterography-based technologies might be used to measure...
Saved in:
Published in: | Gastroenterology (New York, N.Y. 1943) Vol. 158; no. 1; pp. 137 - 150.e1 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
United States
Elsevier Inc
01-01-2020
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Stenosis is a common complication of Crohn’s disease (CD) that has no effective medical therapy. Development of antifibrotic agents will require testing in randomized controlled trials. Computed tomography enterography- and magnetic resonance enterography-based technologies might be used to measure outcomes in these trials. These approaches have been validated in studies of patients with symptomatic strictures who underwent imaging evaluations followed by resection with histopathologic grading of the intestinal tissue for inflammation and/or fibrosis (the reference standard). Imaging findings have correlated with findings from quantitative or semiquantitative histologic evaluation of the degree of fibromuscular stenosis and/or inflammation on the resection specimen. However, it is not clear whether histologic findings are an accurate reference standard. We performed a systematic review of all published histologic scoring systems used to assess stenosing CD.
We performed a comprehensive search of Embase and MEDLINE of studies through March 13, 2019, that used a histologic scoring system to characterize small bowel CD and assessed inflammatory and fibrotic alterations within the same adult individual. All scores fitting the criteria were included in our analysis, independent of the presence of stricturing disease, as long as inflammation and fibrosis were evaluated separately but in the same scoring system.
We observed substantial heterogeneity among the scoring systems, which were not derived from modern principles for evaluative index development. None had undergone formal validity or reliability testing. None of the existing indices had been constructed according to accepted methods for the development of evaluative indices. Basic knowledge regarding their operating properties were lacking. Specific indices for evaluating the important pathologic component of myofibroblast hypertrophy or hyperplasia have not been proposed.
In a systematic review of publications, we found a lack of validated histopathologic scoring systems for assessment of fibromuscular stenosis. Data that describe the operating properties of existing cross-sectional imaging techniques for stenosing CD should be questioned. Development and validation of a histopathology index is an important research priority. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3 JG Fletcher: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Christophe Rosty: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Florian Rieder: study concept and design; analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content; obtained funding; administrative, technical and material support; study supervision. Paula Borralho: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Vipul Jairath: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Authors marked in bold contributed equally to the respective manuscript. AUTHORS CONTRIBUTION Arne Bokemeyer: acquisition of data; analysis and interpretation of data; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content; administrative and technical support. Gert De Hertogh: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Reetesh K. Pai: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Noam Harpaz: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Roger Feakins: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content these authors contributed equally and share first authorship Dominik Bettenworth: study concept and design; acquisition of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content; analysis and interpretation of data. Satya Kurada: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Ren Mao: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content David Bruining: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Amitabh Srivastava: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Robert Odze: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Ilyssa Gordon: study concept and design; acquisition of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content; analysis and interpretation of data. Marie Robert: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Mark A. Valasek: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Rish K. Pai: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Tran Nguyen: study concept and design; analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content; administrative, technical and material support Mark Baker: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content Claire E. Parker: study concept and design; analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content; administrative, technical and material support Brian Feagan: analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; obtained funding; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content; study supervision. |
ISSN: | 0016-5085 1528-0012 |
DOI: | 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.08.033 |