Defining a proper setting for endoscopy in coeliac disease

Katerina Vjero, Susi Martucci, Costanza Alvisi, Francesco Broglia, Francesca Torello Viera, Maurizio Perego, Gino Roberto Corazza

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: As it has been demonstrated that a careful duodenal inspection during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy may be useful in predicting coeliac disease, we tried to define the usefulness of endoscopy in detecting unsuspected coeliac patients. Design and methods: We considered all the first diagnoses of coeliac disease from 1992 to 2001, i.e. 110 patients with a biopsy-proven diagnosis of coeliac disease. From 1992 to 1997, neither of the endoscopists paid careful attention to the endoscopic features of coeliac disease in the course of the examinations performed for indications other than coeliac disease. From 1998 to 2001, the same endoscopists looked very carefully at these endoscopic features, regardless of the indication for the procedure. Results: Over the first period, 22/16 081 patients endoscoped for the first time had a histological diagnosis of coeliac disease, with a prevalence of 1/731. In all 22 patients the indication for the examination was the suspicion of coeliac disease. The endoscopic appearance of the duodenum was indicative in 16/22 (72.7%) patients. Over the second period, the diagnosis of coeliac disease was made in 88/10 410 patients endoscoped for the first time. The prevalence of the disease was 1/118 examinations performed. The endoscopic appearance of the duodenum was indicative in 70/88 (79.5%) patients. In 13/88 patients, the diagnosis of coeliac disease was presumed because of the macroscopic appearance of duodenum, lacking a past history suggestive of coeliac disease. Conclusions: Despite a still open controversy on the accuracy of endoscopic markers in the diagnosis of coeliac disease, we have found that in subjects not suspected for coeliac disease and undergoing an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for other reasons, attention to the endoscopic pattern could facilitate the identification of a relevant number of cases.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)675-678
Number of pages4
JournalEuropean Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Volume15
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2003

Fingerprint

Celiac Disease
Endoscopy
Duodenum
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Abdomen
Biopsy

Keywords

  • Coeliac disease
  • Diagnosis
  • Duodenum
  • Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Defining a proper setting for endoscopy in coeliac disease. / Vjero, Katerina; Martucci, Susi; Alvisi, Costanza; Broglia, Francesco; Viera, Francesca Torello; Perego, Maurizio; Corazza, Gino Roberto.

In: European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Vol. 15, No. 6, 01.06.2003, p. 675-678.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3a9a4a491def4af1936cccafe239080b,
title = "Defining a proper setting for endoscopy in coeliac disease",
abstract = "Objective: As it has been demonstrated that a careful duodenal inspection during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy may be useful in predicting coeliac disease, we tried to define the usefulness of endoscopy in detecting unsuspected coeliac patients. Design and methods: We considered all the first diagnoses of coeliac disease from 1992 to 2001, i.e. 110 patients with a biopsy-proven diagnosis of coeliac disease. From 1992 to 1997, neither of the endoscopists paid careful attention to the endoscopic features of coeliac disease in the course of the examinations performed for indications other than coeliac disease. From 1998 to 2001, the same endoscopists looked very carefully at these endoscopic features, regardless of the indication for the procedure. Results: Over the first period, 22/16 081 patients endoscoped for the first time had a histological diagnosis of coeliac disease, with a prevalence of 1/731. In all 22 patients the indication for the examination was the suspicion of coeliac disease. The endoscopic appearance of the duodenum was indicative in 16/22 (72.7{\%}) patients. Over the second period, the diagnosis of coeliac disease was made in 88/10 410 patients endoscoped for the first time. The prevalence of the disease was 1/118 examinations performed. The endoscopic appearance of the duodenum was indicative in 70/88 (79.5{\%}) patients. In 13/88 patients, the diagnosis of coeliac disease was presumed because of the macroscopic appearance of duodenum, lacking a past history suggestive of coeliac disease. Conclusions: Despite a still open controversy on the accuracy of endoscopic markers in the diagnosis of coeliac disease, we have found that in subjects not suspected for coeliac disease and undergoing an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for other reasons, attention to the endoscopic pattern could facilitate the identification of a relevant number of cases.",
keywords = "Coeliac disease, Diagnosis, Duodenum, Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy",
author = "Katerina Vjero and Susi Martucci and Costanza Alvisi and Francesco Broglia and Viera, {Francesca Torello} and Maurizio Perego and Corazza, {Gino Roberto}",
year = "2003",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/00042737-200306000-00015",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "675--678",
journal = "European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology",
issn = "0954-691X",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Defining a proper setting for endoscopy in coeliac disease

AU - Vjero, Katerina

AU - Martucci, Susi

AU - Alvisi, Costanza

AU - Broglia, Francesco

AU - Viera, Francesca Torello

AU - Perego, Maurizio

AU - Corazza, Gino Roberto

PY - 2003/6/1

Y1 - 2003/6/1

N2 - Objective: As it has been demonstrated that a careful duodenal inspection during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy may be useful in predicting coeliac disease, we tried to define the usefulness of endoscopy in detecting unsuspected coeliac patients. Design and methods: We considered all the first diagnoses of coeliac disease from 1992 to 2001, i.e. 110 patients with a biopsy-proven diagnosis of coeliac disease. From 1992 to 1997, neither of the endoscopists paid careful attention to the endoscopic features of coeliac disease in the course of the examinations performed for indications other than coeliac disease. From 1998 to 2001, the same endoscopists looked very carefully at these endoscopic features, regardless of the indication for the procedure. Results: Over the first period, 22/16 081 patients endoscoped for the first time had a histological diagnosis of coeliac disease, with a prevalence of 1/731. In all 22 patients the indication for the examination was the suspicion of coeliac disease. The endoscopic appearance of the duodenum was indicative in 16/22 (72.7%) patients. Over the second period, the diagnosis of coeliac disease was made in 88/10 410 patients endoscoped for the first time. The prevalence of the disease was 1/118 examinations performed. The endoscopic appearance of the duodenum was indicative in 70/88 (79.5%) patients. In 13/88 patients, the diagnosis of coeliac disease was presumed because of the macroscopic appearance of duodenum, lacking a past history suggestive of coeliac disease. Conclusions: Despite a still open controversy on the accuracy of endoscopic markers in the diagnosis of coeliac disease, we have found that in subjects not suspected for coeliac disease and undergoing an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for other reasons, attention to the endoscopic pattern could facilitate the identification of a relevant number of cases.

AB - Objective: As it has been demonstrated that a careful duodenal inspection during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy may be useful in predicting coeliac disease, we tried to define the usefulness of endoscopy in detecting unsuspected coeliac patients. Design and methods: We considered all the first diagnoses of coeliac disease from 1992 to 2001, i.e. 110 patients with a biopsy-proven diagnosis of coeliac disease. From 1992 to 1997, neither of the endoscopists paid careful attention to the endoscopic features of coeliac disease in the course of the examinations performed for indications other than coeliac disease. From 1998 to 2001, the same endoscopists looked very carefully at these endoscopic features, regardless of the indication for the procedure. Results: Over the first period, 22/16 081 patients endoscoped for the first time had a histological diagnosis of coeliac disease, with a prevalence of 1/731. In all 22 patients the indication for the examination was the suspicion of coeliac disease. The endoscopic appearance of the duodenum was indicative in 16/22 (72.7%) patients. Over the second period, the diagnosis of coeliac disease was made in 88/10 410 patients endoscoped for the first time. The prevalence of the disease was 1/118 examinations performed. The endoscopic appearance of the duodenum was indicative in 70/88 (79.5%) patients. In 13/88 patients, the diagnosis of coeliac disease was presumed because of the macroscopic appearance of duodenum, lacking a past history suggestive of coeliac disease. Conclusions: Despite a still open controversy on the accuracy of endoscopic markers in the diagnosis of coeliac disease, we have found that in subjects not suspected for coeliac disease and undergoing an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for other reasons, attention to the endoscopic pattern could facilitate the identification of a relevant number of cases.

KW - Coeliac disease

KW - Diagnosis

KW - Duodenum

KW - Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037783255&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037783255&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00042737-200306000-00015

DO - 10.1097/00042737-200306000-00015

M3 - Article

C2 - 12840680

AN - SCOPUS:0037783255

VL - 15

SP - 675

EP - 678

JO - European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology

JF - European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology

SN - 0954-691X

IS - 6

ER -