3.8 Article

Diagnostic accuracy of confocal laser endomicroscopy in diagnosing dysplasia in patients affected by long-standing ulcerative colitis

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY
Volume 4, Issue 9, Pages 414-420

Publisher

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v4.i9.414

Keywords

Ulcerative colitis; Cancer; Confocal; Surveillance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AIM: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE) for the detection of dysplasia in long-standing ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: We prospectively performed a surveillance colonoscopy in 51 patients affected by long-standing UC. Also, in the presence of macroscopic areas with suspected dysplasia, both targeted contrasted indigo carmine endoscopic assessment and probe-based CLE were performed. Colic mucosal biopsies and histology, utilised as the gold standard, were assessed randomly and on visible lesions, in accordance with current guidelines. RESULTS: Fourteen of the 51 patients (27%) showed macroscopic mucosal alterations with the suspected presence of dysplasia, needing chromoendoscopic and CLE evaluation. In 5 macroscopically suspected cases, the presence of dysplasia was confirmed by histology (3 flat dysplasia; 2 DALMs). No dysplasia/cancer was found on any of the outstanding random biopsies. The diagnostic accuracy of CLE for the detection of dysplasia compared to standard histology was sensitivity 100%, specificity 90%, positive predictive value 83% and negative predictive value 100%. CONCLUSION: CLE is an accurate tool for the detection of dysplasia in long-standing UC and shows optimal values of sensitivity and negative predictivity. The scheduled combined application of chromoendoscopy and CLE could maximize the endoscopic diagnostic accuracy for diagnosis of dysplasia in UC patients, thus limiting the need for biopsies. (C) 2012 Baishideng. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available