Ulcerative Colitis: Atkinson R

Hurlstone DP, Sanders DS, Atkinson R, Hunter MD, McAlindon ME, Lobo AJ, Cross SS, Thomson M. · Gastroenterology and Liver Unit at the Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK. · Gut. · Pubmed #17135310 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The potential of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for treating flat dysplastic lesions in chronic ulcerative colitis (CUC) has not been addressed so far. Historically, such lesions were referred for colectomy. Furthermore, there are only limited data to support endoscopic resection of exophytic adenoma-like mass (ALM) lesions in colitis. AIMS: To evaluate the safety and clinical outcomes of patients with colitis undergoing EMR for Paris class 0-II and class I ALM compared with sporadic controls. Secondary aims were to re-evaluate the prevalence, anatomical "mapping" and histopathological characteristics of both Paris class 0-II and class I lesions in the context of CUC. METHODS: Prospective clinical, pathological and outcome data of patients with colitis-associated Paris class 0-II and Paris class I ALM treated with EMR (primary end points being colorectal cancer development, resection efficacy, metachronous lesion rates and post-resection recurrence rates) were compared with those of sporadic controls. RESULTS: 204 lesions were diagnosed in 169 patients during the study period: 167 (82%) diagnosed at "entry" colonoscopy, and 36 (18%) diagnosed at follow-up. 170 ALMs, 18 dysplasia-associated lesion masses (DALMs) and 16 cancers were diagnosed. A total of 4316 colonoscopies were performed throughout the study period (median per patient: 6; range: 1-8). The median follow-up period for the complete cohort was 4.1 years (range: 3.6-5.21). 1675 controls were included from our prospective database of patients without CUC who had undergone EMR for sporadic Paris class 0-II and snare polypectomy of Paris type I lesions from 1998 onwards, and were considered to be at moderate to high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer. 3792 colonoscopies were performed throughout the study period in this group (median per patient: 4; range: 1-7). The median follow-up period was 4.8 years (range: 2.9-5.2). No statistically significant differences were observed between the CUC study group and controls with respect to age, sex, median number of colonoscopies per patient, median follow-up duration, post-resection complications, median lesional diameter or interval cancer rates. However, there was a significant between-group difference regarding the prevalence of Paris class 0-II lesions in the CUC group (82/155 (61%)) compared with controls (285/801 (35%); chi(2) = 31.13; p<0.001). Furthermore, recurrence rates of lateral spreading tumours were higher in the colitis cohort (1/7 (14%)) than among controls (0/10 (0%); p = 0.048 (95% CI 11.64% to 40.21%)). CONCLUSIONS: Flat DALM, similarly to Paris class I ALM, can be managed safely by EMR in CUC. A change in management paradigm to include EMR for the resection of flat dysplastic lesions in selected cases is proposed.

Hurlstone DP, Kiesslich R, Thomson M, Atkinson R, Cross SS. · Gastroenterology and Liver Unit at the Royal Hallamshire Hospital Sheffield/The Sheffield Hallam University Academy of Endomicroscopy, Sheffield, UK. · Gut. · Pubmed #18192453 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of intraepithelial neoplasia is pivotal for ongoing clinical management decisions in ulcerative colitis. Previous studies have compared the diagnostic yield of endomicroscopy with conventional "white light" endoscopy and hence the overall objective increase of endomicroscopy targeted biopsies as compared to chromoscopy guided alone is not apparent. AIMS: We performed a prospective randomised controlled study to compare the diagnostic yield of intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer in patients undergoing ulcerative colitis screening using chromoscopy assisted endomicroscopy (group A) versus pan-colonic chromoscopy assisted colonoscopy (group B). METHODS: Patients were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to undergo screening colonoscopy using either chromoscopic endomicroscopy or chromoscopy alone with targeted biopsies. Circumscribed lesions were characterised using endomicroscopy and chromoscopy with pit pattern analysis. Targeted biopsies in addition to conventional 10 cm quadrantic biopsies were taken. Primary outcome addressed the number of intraepithelial neoplasias detected in each group. RESULTS: Endomicroscopy targeted biopsies significantly increased the yield of intraepithelial neoplasia as compared to pan-chromoscopy and biopsy alone (p<0.001) and also increased the yield of high-grade dysplastic lesions (p<0.001). Endomicroscopy targeted biopsies increased the diagnostic yield of intraepithelial neoplasia as compared to chromoscopy guided biopsies alone by 2.5-fold. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first randomised controlled study to show the true clinical benefit of endomicroscopy for the in vivo detection and characterisation of intraepithelial neoplasia in chronic ulcerative colitis surveillance colonoscopy. Endomicroscopy with targeted biopsy may potentially be the "gold standard" for the detection of intraepithelial neoplasia in ulcerative colitis.