RESUMO
Background and study aims: The Paris classification characterizes the morphology of superficial gastrointestinal tract neoplasms. This system has been shown to predict the risk of submucosal invasion in certain subtypes of lesions. There is limited data that assesses its agreement amongst endoscopists. We performed a systematic review to summarize the available literature on the interobserver reliability (IOR) of the Paris classification. Methods: We conducted a search through December 2020 for studies reporting IOR of the Paris classification. Studies were included if they quantitatively evaluated the IOR of the Paris classification with at least five participating endoscopists. Two authors independently screened studies and abstracted data using an a priori-designed data collection form. Evaluation of study quality and risk of bias was performed using an adapted version of the Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies. Results: Of the 1,541 studies retrieved, 5 were included in the review. All studies were observational cohort studies published between 2014 and 2020. The IOR of the Paris classification was moderate amongst all four studies evaluating colorectal neoplasms (range, κ = 0.42 to κ = 0.54) and substantial in one study that evaluated gastric neoplasms (κw = 0.65). An educational intervention was conducted by three studies with variable methodology and no significant change in IOR. Conclusions: IOR of the Paris classification is moderate for superficial colonic neoplasms. Further study is needed to determine the reliability of this system for superficial gastric lesions. Standardized training programs are required to investigate the impact of educational intervention on the Paris classification amongst endoscopists.
RESUMO
Cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Intestinal cancers may arise as a complication of IBD itself, while extra-intestinal cancers may arise due to some of the immunosuppressive therapies used to treat IBD. Colorectal cancer (CRC) and small bowel cancer risks remain elevated among persons with IBD as compared to age-and sex-matched members of the general population, and the lifetime risk of these cancers is strongly correlated to cumulative intestinal inflammatory burden. However, the cumulative risk of cancer, even among those with IBD is still low. Some studies suggest that IBD-CRC incidence has declined over the years, possibly owing to improved treatment standards and improved detection and management of early neoplastic lesions. Across studies of extra-intestinal cancers, there are generally higher incidences of melanoma, hepatobiliary cancer, and lung cancer and no higher incidences of breast cancer or prostate cancer, with equivocal risk of cervical cancer, among persons with IBD. While the relative risks of some extra-intestinal cancers are increased with treatment, the absolute risks of these cancers remain low and the decision to forego treatment in light of these risks should be carefully weighed against the increased risks of intestinal cancers and other disease-related complications with undertreated inflammatory disease. Quality improvement efforts should focus on optimized surveillance of cancers for which surveillance strategies exist (colorectal cancer, hepatobiliary cancer, cervical cancers, and skin cancers) and the development of cost-effective surveillance strategies for less common cancers associated with IBD.
RESUMO
The therapeutic landscape for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has changed considerably over the past two decades, owing to the development and widespread penetration of targeted therapies, including biologics and small molecules. While some conventional treatments continue to have an important role in the management of IBD, treatment of IBD is increasingly moving towards targeted therapies given their greater efficacy and safety in comparison to conventional agents. Early introduction of these therapies-particularly in persons with Crohn's disease-combining targeted therapies with traditional anti-metabolite immunomodulators and targeting objective markers of disease activity (in addition to symptoms), have been shown to improve health outcomes and will be increasingly adopted over time. The substantially increased costs associated with targeted therapies has led to a ballooning of healthcare expenditure to treat IBD over the past 15 years. The introduction of less expensive biosimilar anti-tumour necrosis factor therapies may bend this cost curve downwards, potentially allowing for more widespread access to these medications. Newer therapies targeting different inflammatory pathways and complementary and alternative therapies (including novel diets) will continue to shape the IBD treatment landscape. More precise use of a growing number of targeted therapies in the right individuals at the right time will help minimize the development of expensive and disabling complications, which has the potential to further reduce costs and improve outcomes.
RESUMO
Background: Pancolonic dye spray chromoendoscopy (DCE) is used as an adjunct to white light endoscopy (WLE) to enhance the detection and delineation of ill-defined neoplastic (dysplastic) lesions in persons with colonic inflammatory bowel diseases (cIBD). We evaluated the utility of DCE as follow-up to high-definition WLE (HD-WLE) to "unmask" and/or facilitate endoscopic resection of neoplastic lesions. Methods: We retrospectively studied persons with cIBD who underwent DCE as follow-up to HD-WLE between 2013 and 2020. We describe neoplastic findings and management during HD-WLE and DCE exams and report outcomes from post-DCE surveillance exams. Results: Twenty-four persons were studied (mean age 56.7 ± 13.8 years, 50.0% male, 70.8% ulcerative colitis, mean disease duration 18.0 ± 11.0 years). Overall, 32 visible neoplastic lesions were unmasked during DCE, of which 24 were endoscopically resected. DCE facilitated the diagnosis of two cancers. Among 17 persons referred for evaluation of "invisible" neoplasia (detected in non-targeted biopsies) during HD-WLE, DCE identified neoplastic lesions at the same site in eight persons and a different site in four persons. Among seven persons referred for ill-defined visible neoplasia, DCE facilitated complete endoscopic resection in four individuals, whereas two individuals required colectomy for a diagnosis of cancer. Among 19 individuals with post-DCE surveillance, five developed new visible neoplastic lesions, including one high-grade neoplasia which was completely resected. Conclusions: In our cohort, DCE aided in unmasking invisible neoplasia and facilitated endoscopic resection of ill-defined neoplasia, suggesting that it is a useful surveillance tool in selected persons with cIBD. Large prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.
