Journals / Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology / 2013 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 1

Endoskopik sınıflama sistemlerinin çocuklardaki tanısal değeri nedir?

What is the diagnostic utility of endoscopic scoring systems in children?

Pages
22–29
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The inclusion of minimal endoscopic changes in endoscopic scoring systems by using more sensitive and novel endoscopic techniques would increase the sensitivity of these scoring systems in children.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the consistency of the Savary-Miller, the Hetzel-Dent and the Los Angeles endoscopic classification systems and to compare them with the esophageal histopathology in children.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: Children between the ages of 5-17 years who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy were included in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The inclusion of minimal endoscopic changes in endoscopic scoring systems by using more sensitive and novel endoscopic techniques would increase the sensitivity of these scoring systems in children.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Background/aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the consistency of the Savary-Miller, the Hetzel-Dent and the Los Angeles endoscopic classification systems and to compare them with the esophageal histopathology in children. Material and Methods: Children between the ages of 5-17 years who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy were included in the study. The endoscopic reports and the still images of the esophagus were reclassified by the same gastroenterologist according to the Savary-Miller, Hetzel-Dent and Los Angeles scoring systems. The esophageal biopsies were also reevaluated by the same pathologist and the consistency between endoscopic and histopathologic esophagitis was evaluated. Results: A total of 113 out of 192 pediatric patients were included in the study. Seventy-three patients (64.6%) had esophagitis according to the Hetzel-Dent classification, whereas only 20 (17.7%) patients were defined as having esophagitis according to the other two classification systems. The consistency between the Savary-Miller and Los Angeles classifications was excellent (κ: 0.92) but the agreement between the Hetzel-Dent and Savary-Miller and between the Hetzel-Dent and Los Angeles classifications were poor. A total of 82 patients (72.6%) had histopathological esophagitis, and there was a weak consistency between all 3 endoscopic scoring systems and the histopathology. Conclusions: Since pediatric patients have milder esophagitis than in adults, the use of endoscopic scoring systems developed for adults seems to be inapplicable for children. The inclusion of minimal endoscopic changes in endoscopic scoring systems by using more sensitive and novel endoscopic techniques would increase the sensitivity of these scoring systems in children.

Özet

Amaç: Çalışmanın amacı, çocuklarda Savary-Miller, Hetzel-Dent ve Los Angeles endoskopik sınışama sistemlerinin kendi aralarındaki uyumunu araştırmak ve bunları özofageal histopatoloji verileri ile karşılaştırmaktır. Materyal ve Metot: Özofagogastro- duodenoskopi yapılan 5-17 yaş arasındaki çocuklar çalışmaya dahil edildi. Endoskopi raporları ve fotoğraşarı, aynı gastroenterolog tarafından, Savary-Miller, Hetzel-Dent ve Los Angeles sınıflamalarına göre yeniden skorlandı. Ayrıca özofageal biyopsiler de aynı patolog tarafından tekrar değerlendirildi, endoskopik ve histopatolojik özofajit arasındaki uyum araştırıldı. Bulgular: Toplam 192 çocuk hastanın 113’ü çalışmaya alındı. Hetzel-Dent sınıflamasına göre 73 hastada (%64.6) özofajit söz konusu iken, diğer iki sınıflama sistemine göre ise sadece 20’şer hastada (%17.7) özofajit tanımlandı. Savary-Miller ve Los Angeles sınıflamaları arasında mükemmel bir uyum (κ: 0.92) varken, Hetzel-Dent-Savary-Miller ve Hetzel-Dent-Los Angeles sınıflamaları arasındaki uyum zayıf düzeydeydi. Toplam 82 hastada (%72.6) histopatolojik özofajit belirlendi, her 3 endoskopik sınıflama sistemi ile histopatolojik sısnıflama arasıgndaki uyum zayıf seviyede bulundu. Sonuç: Çocuk hastalardaki özofajit erişkinlere göre daha hafif seviyede olduğundan, erişkinler için geliştirilmiş olan endoskopik sınıflama sistemlerinin çocuklarda kullanılması uygun görünmemektedir. Daha hassas ve yeni endoskopik tekniklerin kullanılması devreye girmesi sonucu, minimal endoskopik değişikliklerin endoskopik sınıflama sistemlerine dahil edilmesi ile, çocuklardaki reflü özofajit tanı olasılığı artırılabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TUTAR, E., KUTLUK, G., BAYRAK, N. A., ATAİZİ, Ç. Ç., PEHLİVANOĞLU, R. E., ŞAHİNOĞLU, D. E. (2013). Endoskopik sınıflama sistemlerinin çocuklardaki tanısal değeri nedir?. Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 1, 22–29. https://ajindex.com/articles/411407

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Locke GR 3rd. Natural history of nonerosive reflux disease. Is all gastroesophageal reflux disease the same? What is the evidence? Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2002; 31:S59- 66
  2. Stanghellini V. Relationship between upper gastrointestinal symptoms and lifestyle, psychosocial factors and comorbidity in the general population: results from the Domestic/ International Gastroenterology Surveillance Study (DIGEST). Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl 1999; 231:29-37
  3. Dent J, El-Serag HB, Wallander MA, et al. Epidemiology of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review. Gut 2005;54:710-17
  4. Nelson SP, Chen EH, Syniar GM, et al. Prevalence of symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux during childhood: a pediatric practicebased survey. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2000;154:150-4
  5. Nayar DS, Vaezi MF. Classifications of esophagitis: Who needs them? Gastrointest Endosc 2004;60:253-57
  6. Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, et al. The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:1900-20
  7. Savary M, Miller G. The Oesophagus, Handbook and Atlas of Endoscopy. Solothorn, Switzerland: Gassman AG, 1978
  8. Hetzel DJ, Dent J, Reed WD, et al. Healing and relapse of severe peptic esophagitis after treatment with omeprazole. Gastroenterology 1988;95:903-12
  9. Lundell LR, Dent J, Bennett JR, et al. Endoscopic assessment of oesophagitis: clinical and functional correlates and further validation of the Los Angeles classification. Gut 1999;45:172-80
  10. Rath HC, Timmer A, Kunkel C, et al. Comparison of interobserver agreement for different scoring systems for reflux esophagitis: impact of level of experience. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;60:44-9
  11. Miwa H, Yokoyama T, Hori K, et al. Interobserver agreement in endoscopic evaluation of reflux esophagitis using a modified Los Angeles classification incorporating grades N and M: A validation study in a cohort of Japanese endoscopists. Dis Esophagus 2008;21:355-63
  12. Nasseri-Moghaddam S, Razjouyan H, Nouraei M, et al. Inter- and intra-observer variability of the Los Angeles classification: a reassessment. Arch Iran Med 2007;10:48-53. 28 13. Pandolfino JE, Vakil NB, Kahrilas PJ. Comparison of inter- and intraobserver consistency for grading of esophagitis by expert and trainee endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 56:639-43
  13. Kim JH, Park H, Lee YC, and the MIGHT study group. Is minimal change esophagitis really part of the spectrum