Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10745746

Microscopic colitis.

P Trolli
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Endoscopy nurses and associates occasionally find themselves assisting with colonoscopies in which biopsy specimens are obtained from normal-appearing mucosa to rule out microscopic colitis. A review of the literature was undertaken to learn more about this uncommon but troublesome cause of chronic diarrhea in patients. The few studies completed have been small and have yielded some conflicting and controversial data regarding many aspects of the two forms of microscopic colitis. Some findings, however, have been consistent and may help to provide a better understanding of this challenging syndrome for gastroenterology nurses.

Explore related subjects

BiopsyChronic DiseaseColitisColonoscopyDiarrheaGastroenterologyHumansSpecialties, NursingJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Trolli. Microscopic colitis.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001610-199907000-00005

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2000

Pathologic findings and prostate specific antigen outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients diagnosed on the basis of a single microscopic focus of prostate carcinoma with a gleason score </= 7.

BACKGROUND: Whether patients who are diagnosed on the basis of a single microscopic focus of prostate carcinoma with a Gleason score </= 7 (micro PC) have potentially life-threatening disease if they are not treated is unknown. METHODS: Pathologic findings and prostate specific antigen (PSA) outcome after radical prostatectomy (RP) for men who were diagnosed with micro PC were determined. Of 917 patients who were managed with RP during 1989-1999 at the Brigham and Women's Hospital, 66 patients (7%) were diagnosed on the basis of micro PC. Pathologic stage, tumor grade, tumor volume, margin status, and PSA outcome were investigated and are reported. Estimates of PSA outcome were calculated using the actuarial method of Kaplan and Meier. Pairwise comparisons were made using the log rank test. RESULTS: The finding of micro PC at biopsy was associated with macroscopic disease (involving at least half of a single lobe) in 92% of the patients in this series. Although these men had favorable pathologic findings (94% had organ confined disease, 89% had negative tumor margins, and 79% had a prostatectomy Gleason score </= 6), approximately 10% of the patients failed biochemically within 5 years after RP. CONCLUSIONS: The finding of micro PC at biopsy should not be used as a surrogate for clinically insignificant disease.

Biopsy↗
PubMed2000

Detection of prostate cancer: a comparative study of the diagnostic efficacy of sextant transrectal versus sextant transperineal biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: The optimal biopsy strategy for the detection of prostate cancer still needs to be established, since a considerable proportion of clinically significant cancers remains undiagnosed on routine sextant transrectal biopsy. To assess the efficacy of transperineal biopsy to detect prostate cancer, we compared this approach to systematic sextant transrectal biopsy in a simulation experiment. METHODS: Ultrasound-guided sextant transverse (transrectal) biopsy and subsequent sextant longitudinal (transperineal) biopsy were performed on 40 radical prostatectomy specimens of patients with (transrectal) biopsy-detected prostate cancer. Conditions were simulative and may not be completely analogous to clinical settings. Ultrasound-determined prostate volume, biopsy tumor involvement, number of cores with cancer, and tumor volume were determined. Detailed mapping of radical prostatectomy specimens provided insight into the representativeness of the biopsy techniques. RESULTS: Of 40 cancers, 33 (82.5%) were redetected by the transperineal approach; 29 (72.5%) were detected by repeated transrectal biopsies. For both approaches, the tumor volume of the undiagnosed cancers was significantly smaller (P <0.01) and the prostate volume was significantly larger (P <0.01) than in the redetected ones. Between the two approaches, no difference was found for either of the variables determined in the redetected cancers. Prostate maps clarified that transperineal undiagnosed tumors were either small (0.2 cm(3) or less) or notably located at the prostatic base. CONCLUSIONS: The biopsy procedure in which the biopsy needles enter the prostate at the apex for a longitudinal direction may efficiently sample the prostatic peripheral zone. Since the experiment was artificial in design, caution should be observed in extrapolating these results to patient settings.

Biopsy↗