The use of clinical, histologic, and serologic parameters to predict the intragastric extent of intestinal metaplasia: a recommendation for routine practice

Background Surveillance of intestinal metaplasia (IM) of the gastric mucosa should be limited to patients at high risk of gastric cancer. Patients with extensive IM are at increased cancer risk; however, the intragastric extent of IM is usually unknown at the time of the initial diagnosis. Objective...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inGastrointestinal endoscopy Vol. 70; no. 1; pp. 18 - 25
Main Authors de Vries, Annemarie C., MD, Haringsma, Jelle, MD, de Vries, Richard A., MD, PhD, ter Borg, Frank, MD, PhD, Nagtzaam, Nicole M., Bsc, Steyerberg, Ewout W., PhD, van Dekken, Herman, MD, PhD, Kuipers, Ernst J., MD, PhD
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Maryland heights, MO Mosby, Inc 01.07.2009
Elsevier
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Background Surveillance of intestinal metaplasia (IM) of the gastric mucosa should be limited to patients at high risk of gastric cancer. Patients with extensive IM are at increased cancer risk; however, the intragastric extent of IM is usually unknown at the time of the initial diagnosis. Objective To assess the predictive value of clinical, histologic, and serologic parameters for the intragastric extent of IM. Design and Setting Prospective, multicenter study. Patients Eighty-eight patients with a previous diagnosis of IM of the gastric mucosa. Intervention Surveillance gastroscopy with extensive random biopsy sampling. Main Outcome Measurements Biopsy specimens were evaluated according to the Sydney classification system. In addition, serologic testing of Helicobacter pylori and cagA status, pepsinogens I and II, gastrin, and intrinsic factor antibodies was performed. The association between the available parameters and extensive IM was evaluated with logistic regression analysis. Results In 51 patients (58%), IM was present in the biopsy specimens from at least 2 intragastric locations. The most important predictors of extensive IM were a family history of gastric cancer, alcohol use ≥1 unit/d (1 glass, approximately 10 mL or 8 g ethanol), moderate or marked IM of the index biopsy specimen, and a pepsinogen I to II ratio <3.0. A simple risk score based on these factors could identify extensive IM in 24 of 25 patients (sensitivity 96%). Limitation A prospective cohort study should confirm the proposed risk stratification. Conclusions A risk score of clinical, histologic, and serologic parameters can predict extensive intragastric IM and may serve as a practical tool to select patients for surveillance endoscopy in routine clinical practice.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0016-5107
1097-6779
DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2008.08.041