What is the consistency between the diagnoses of endoscopists and pathologists concerning gastroduodenal mucosa?

Year 2012, Volume: 20 Issue: 1, 13 - 16, 01.04.2012

Elmas Kasap Gökçen Güngör Emine Aygör Özlem Suade Badak Semin Ayhan Hakan Yüceyar

https://doi.org/10.17940/endoskopi.74841

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Background/aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the consistency of the diagnoses by endoscopists and pathologists, to determine whether the endoscopic diagnosis is adequate, and to compare the endosco- pic and pathological diagnoses of Helicobacter pylori. Materials and Met- hods: 1597 subjects who underwent an upper endoscopy and an endoscopic biopsy (antrum and corpus) were recruited retrospectively from Celal Bayar University Gastroenterology Department in Manisa, Turkey between January 2008 and January 2010. Results: The specificity was 86.8%, sensitivity 30.8%, positive predictive value 19.4%, and negative predictive value 92.4% between the endoscopically normal and pathologically normal cases. The spe- cificity was 30.8% and sensitivity 85.3%, with a positive predictive value of 89.6% and a negative predictive value of 23.1% between gastritis shown en- doscopically versus pathologically. The specificity was 99.1% and sensitivity 96.4%, with a positive predictive value of 84.3% and negative predictive va- lue of 99.8%, between malignancy shown endoscopically versus pathologi- cally. Helicobacter pylori was positive in 653 (40%) patients. Conclusions: Although the endoscopic and pathological diagnoses were compatible, espe- cially when examining malignancy and gastritis, and despite the fact that the endoscopic evaluations of the upper gastrointestinal system were deemed to be normal, a biopsy is still recommended.

Keywords

Endoscopic diagnosis, pathological diagnosis, Helicobacter pylori

Üst gastrointestinal mukozayı değerlendirmede endoskopistler ve patologlar ne kadar uyumludur?

Abstract

Giriş ve Amaç: Çalışmanın amacı endoskopist ve patologların üst gastroin testinal mukoza tanıları arasındaki uyumu araştırmak ve endoskopik ve patolojik tanılara göre Helikobakter pilori sıklığını belirlemekdir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmaya Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Gastroenteroloji kliniğinde Haziran 2008-Haziran 2010 yılları arasında üst gastrointestinal sistem endoskopisi ve biyopsisi yapılan 1597 olgu retrospektif incelenerek dahil edilmiştir. Bulgular: Endoskopik olarak normal bulunan olguların patolojik olarak normal değerlendirilmesinde özgüllük %86.8, duyarlılık %30.8, pozitif prediktif değer %19.4 ve negatif prediktif değer %92.4, endoskopik olarak gastrit değerlendirilen olguların patolojik olarak da gastrit olarak değerlendi rilmesinde özgüllük %30.8, duyarlılık %85.3, pozitif prediktif değer %89.6 ve negatif prediktif değer %23.1, endoskopik olarak malign değerlendirilen olgularda patolojik olarak da malign değerlendirilmede özgüllük %99.1, duyarlılık %96.4, pozitif prediktif değer %84.3 ve negatif prediktif değer %99.8 olarak bulunmuştur. Helikobakter pilori %40 olguda pozitif olaraksaptanmıştır. Sonuç: Her ne kadar endoskopistlerin malinite ve gastrit olarak değerlendirdikleri olgular tanı olarak patologlar ile uyumlu olsa da yalnızca bu gruplardan değil mutlaka endoskopik olarak normal nitelendirilen olgulardan da biyopsi alınması önerilir.

Keywords

Endoskopik tanı, patolojik tanı, Helikobakter pilori

References

• Escourrou J, Salcedo J, Buscail L. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. In: Classen M, Tytgat GNJ, Lightdale CJ, eds. Gastroenterological endos- copy. New York: Thieme, 2002;113-24.
• Ibis M, Arhan M, Odemis B, et al. The relation between endoscopically diagnosed gastritis and its histologic findings. Turk J Academic Gastro- enterol (Akademik Gastroenteroloji) 2009;8:12-7.
• Zhang C, Yamada N, Wu YL, et al. Comparison of Helicobacter pylori in- fection and gastric mucosal histological features of gastric ulcer patients with chronic gastritis patients. World J Gastroenterol 2005;11:976-81.
• Al Hamdani A, Fayadh HM, Abdul Majeed BA. Helicobacter pylori gas- tritis: correlation between endoscopic and histological findings. IJGE 2001;1:43-8.
• Jonsson KA, Gotthard R, Bodemar G, et al. The clinical relevance of en- doscopic and histologic inflammation of a gastroduodenal mucosa in dyspepsia of unknown origin. Scand J Gastroenterol 1989;24:385-95.
• Myren J, Serck-Hanssen A. The gastroscopic diagnosis of gastritis, with particular reference to mucosal reddening and mucus covering. Scand J Gastroenterol 1974;9:457-62.
• Tytgat GNJ. The Sydney system: endoscopic division. Endoscopic appe- arances in gastritis/duodenitis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1991;6:223-34.
• Nazligül Y, Ardali HI, Bitiren M, et al. The value of endoscopy in the di- agnosis of nonerosive antral gastritis. T Klin J Med Sci 1999;19:215-7.
• Kaur G, Raj SM. A study of the concordance between endoscopic gastri- tis and histological gastritis in an area with a low background prevalen- ce of Helicobacter pylori infection. Singapore Med J 2002;43:90-2.
• Khakoo SI, Lobo AJ, Shepherd NA, et al. Histological assessment of the Sydney classification of endoscopic gastritis. Gut 1994;35:1172-5.
• Price B. The Sydney system: histological division. J Gastroenterol Hepa- tol 1991;6:209-22.
• Göral V. Acute and chronic gastritis. Güncel Gastroenteroloji (Current Gastroenterology) 2006;10(4):292-305.
• Altın M. Endoscopy, chromoendoscopy and endosonography in the di- agnosis of early gastric cancer. Endoskopi Dergisi (Endoscopy Gastroin- testinal) 1992;2:44-51.
• Hopkins RJ, Girardi LS, Turney EA. Relationship between Helicobacter pylori eradication and reduced duodenal and gastric ulcer recurrence: a review. Gastroenterology 1996;110:1244-52.
• Göral V, Ozdal B, Kaplan A, et al. The prevalence of Helicobacter pylori in the Diyarbakir city. Turk J Academic Gastroenterol (Akademik Gas- troenteroloji) 2006;5:47-50.