4.5 Article

Outcome After Surveillance of Low-grade and Indefinite Dysplasia in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis

期刊

INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASES
卷 16, 期 8, 页码 1352-1356

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1002/ibd.21184

关键词

ulcerative colitis; dysplasia; colorectal cancer

资金

  1. Cancer Research Foundation, Chicago, IL
  2. Gastro-Intestinal Research Foundation Associates' Board, Chicago, IL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The management of low-grade (LGD) and indefinite dysplasia (IND) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) remains controversial, as outcomes after a diagnosis of LGD or IND in previous studies vary widely. Methods: All patients evaluated were from a single institution referral center who had a history of UC and a diagnosis of either LGD or IND between 1994 and 2008 as confirmed by 2 expert gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists. Data were collected by chart review of electronic and paper medical records. All patients who did not undergo a colectomy within 90 days of their dysplasia diagnosis were included in the final analysis. Hazard ratios for risk factors as well as incidence rates and Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to calculate the progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or colorectal cancer (CRC). Results: Thirty-five patients were included in the analysis, of whom 2 patients with IND and 2 patients with LGD developed HOD or CRC over a mean duration of 49.8 months. In total, the incident rate for advanced neoplasia for all patients was 2.7 cases of HGD or CRC per 100 person-years at risk. For flat and polypoid LGD the incident rate of advanced neoplasia was 4.3 and 1.5 cases per 100 person-years at risk, respectively. Patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) had an incident rate of 10.5 cases per 100 years of patient follow-up. Conclusions: We report a low rate of progression to HOD or CRC in patients who underwent surveillance for LGD or IND; polypoid dysplasia showed less risk of progression than flat dysplasia.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据