4.7 Review

Faecal Calprotectin in Assessment of Mucosal Healing in Adults with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Meta-Analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 10, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10102203

关键词

inflammatory bowel disease; mucosal healing; faecal calprotectin; diagnostics; meta-analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of fecal calprotectin in monitoring mucosal healing in colonic Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis shows good sensitivity and specificity, as well as a high diagnostic odds ratio. This non-invasive test may present an attractive option for monitoring mucosal healing in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.
Achieving mucosal healing in patients with inflammatory bowel disease is related to a higher incidence of sustained clinical remission and it translates to lower rates of hospitalisation and surgery. The assessment methods of disease activity and response to therapy are limited and mainly rely on colonoscopy. This meta-analysis reviews the effectiveness of using faecal calprotectin as a marker for mucosal healing in inflammatory bowel disease. Two meta-analyses were conducted in parallel. The analysis on the use of faecal calprotectin in monitoring mucosal healing in colonic Crohn's disease is based on 16 publications (17 studies). The data set for diagnostic values of faecal calprotectin in ulcerative colitis is composed of 35 original publications (total 49 studies). The DOR for the use of faecal calprotectin in Crohn's disease is estimated to be 11.20 and the area under the sROCis 0.829. In cases of ulcerative colitis, the DOR is 14.48, while the AUC sROC is 0.858. Heterogeneity of the studies was moderatetosubstantial. Collected data show overall good sensitivity and specificity of the faecal calprotectin test, as well as a good DOR. Thus, monitoring of mucosal healing with a non-invasive faecal calprotectin test may represent an attractive option for physicians and patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

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

4.7
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