Full-Thickness Rectal Biopsy in Children Suspected of Having Hirschsprung's Disease: The Inconclusive Biopsy.

The diagnosis of Hirschsprung's disease relies on histologically proven aganglionosis and nerve trunk hypertrophy in rectal biopsies. Although the frequency of inconclusive biopsies is relatively low, it is a relevant clinical problem. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether a re-evaluation of archived full-thickness biopsies (FTBs) stained with hematoxylin and eosin (HE), together with immune histochemical (IHC) staining, would be diagnostic in biopsies otherwise deemed inconclusive at initial examination with HE only. A total of 34 inconclusive biopsies in 31 patients were identified. From each tissue block, three slices were cut and stained with HE, S100 and calretinin. A blinded pathologist examined the tissue samples. At re-evaluation, one patient was found positive for HD and 11 negative for HD with both HE and IHC staining, respectively. In all 12 cases, the result was confirmed by the final diagnosis at a 5-year follow-up. The rest of the cases were deemed inconclusive. A re-evaluation of the remaining tissue from the biobank might have saved one third of the children from a re-biopsy. The value of adding IHC to conventional HE staining is dubious.

Comparison between Suction Rectal Biopsy and Full-Thickness Rectal Biopsy in the Diagnosis of Hirschsprung's Disease.

AIM: The aim of this study is to compare suction rectal biopsy (SRB) with full-thickness rectal biopsy (FTRB) in suspected cases of Hirschsprung's disease (HD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2014 and 2018, we enrolled 41 consecutive children with suspected HD. We analyzed demographics, sex, age, clinical symptoms, radiological images, and biopsy reports. All the children had undergone X-ray of the abdomen and pelvis and contrast enema. All of them have undergone both SRB and FTRB, and their results were compared. RESULTS: Out of 41 children, 26 were male and 15 were female. The children were aged from 5 days to 12 years. All of them presented with delayed passage of meconium, abdominal distension, and severe constipation. They all were on oral laxatives. The sensitivity and specificity of SRB are 80.95% and 90.00% when compared to FTRB which has 100% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSION: FTRB is the gold standard test for diagnosing HD. SRB may be a good screening test in suspected HD cases. SRB is not as equal and effective as FTRB for diagnosing HD.