Platelet Indices in Determination of Marsh Classification in New Diagnosed Celiac Patients
Abstract
Objectives: Celiac disease is an autoimmune and inflammatory disease induced by dietary gluten in genetically susceptible individuals. The most important diagnostic method in celiac disease is histopathological examination, and Marsh classification. It is known that in some inflammatory diseases, systemic inflammatory response markers such as mean platelet volume (MPV), plateletcrit (PCT) and platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) are of diagnostic importance. Our aim in this study is to investigate the importance of systemic inflammatory response markers in determining the Marsh classification
Materials and Methods: Two hundred and fifty patients with gluten sensitive enteropathy were investigated by using MPV, PCT, PLR, and NLR. Patients were stratified into five groups; Group I: Marsh type 1, Group II: Marsh type 2, Group III: Marsh type 3, Group IV: increased intraepithelial lymphocytes, and also one group involving control group (Group V). Results: 250 newly diagnosed celiac patients were divided into 3 groups as Group I (Marsh type 1, n=109), Group II (type 2, n=11) and Group III (type
3, n=130) according to the Marsh classification. Fifty patients with increased intraepithelial lymphocytes (Group IV) and 150 patients with normal duodenal biopsy were taken as the control group (Group V). Patients and control groups were compared in terms of MPV, PCT, PLR, and NLR values.
Conclusion: MPV (8.7±1.07 vs 8.7±1.2 fL, p=0.922), PCT (0.24±0.06 vs 0.22±0.07, p=0.145) and PLR (144.28±61.54 vs 148.59±89.71, p=0.711) values
did not differ compared to the controls. As a result, it is not appropriate to use MPV, PCT, PLR, and NLR in determining the Marsh classification.
Keywords
Çölyak Hastalığı, Marsh Sınıflaması, Platelet İndeksleri, Platelet/Lenfosit Oranı
Ethical Statement
Ethics Committee Approval: This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by
the Ankara City Hospital Ethics Committee (approval no: E2- 22-1447).
Informed Consent: Retrospective study.
Peer-reviewed: Externally peer-reviewed.
Financial Disclosure: The author received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
References
- 1. Lundin KE, Sollid LM. Advances in coeliac disease. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2014;30:154-162.
- 2. Bai D, Brar P, Holleran D, et al. Effect of gender on the manifestations of celiac disease: evidence for greater malabsorption in men. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2005;40:183-187.
- 3. Sategna C, Solerio E, Scaglione N, et al. Duration of gluten exposure in adult coeliac disease does not correlate with the risk for autoimmune disorders. Gut. 2001;49:502-505.
- 4. Niewinski MM. Advences in Celiac Disease and Gluten-Free Diet. J Am Diet Assoc. 2008;108:661-672.
- 5. Rubio-Tapia A, Ludvigsson JF, Brantner TL, et al. The prevalence of celiac disease in the United States. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107:1538-44; quiz 1537, 1545.
- 6. Ciclitera PJ, Evans DJ, Fagg NL, et al. Clinical testing of gliadin fractions on coeliac disease. Clin Science. 2004;66:357-364.
- 7. Marsh MN. Gluten, major histocompatibility complex, and the small intestine. A molecular and immunobiologic approach to the spectrum of gluten sensitivity (‘celiac sprue’). Gastroenterology. 1992;102:330-354.
- 8. Fasano A, Catassi C. Current approaches to diagnosis and treatment of celiac disease: an evolving spectrum. Gastroenterology. 2001;120:636-651.
- 9. Ifran A, Haşimi A, Kaptan K, et al. Evaluation of platelet parameters in healthy apheresis donors using the ADVIA 120. Transfus Apher Sci. 2005;33:87-90.
- 10. Proctor MJ, Morrison DS, Talwar D, et al. A comparison of inflammationbased prognostic scores in patients with cancer. A Glasgow Inflammation Outcome Study. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47:2633-2641.