Plum N, May A, Manner H, Ell C
Dept. of Internal Medicine II, HSK Wiesbaden, Teaching Hospital of the University of Mainz, Germany.
Z Gastroenterol. 2009 Apr;47(4):339-46. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1027984. Epub 2009 Apr 8.
Conventional upper endoscopy (EGD), EGD with side-view endoscope and ileoscopy are established procedures for endoscopic evaluation of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). However, we still have little data on the frequency and relevance of adenomas in those parts of the small bowel which are not accessible to EGD and ileoscopy. Adenomas distal to the duodenum are found more often in FAP patients with known duodenal adenomas. The question is, whether these patients can benefit from additional endoscopic and/or radiographic examinations.
Between July 2001 and August 2006 we performed comparative small bowel studies with push enteroscopy (PE), capsule endoscopy (CE), ileoscopy (IL) and enteroclysis (EC) in 25 FAP patients known to have duodenal adenomas. The number, size and location of any adenomas detected were documented.
PE: The examination revealed duodenal adenomas (max. size 80 mm) requiring treatment in 9 of the 25 patients examined. In 12 of the 25 patients the PE showed adenomas distal to the ligament of Treitz with a maximum size of 15 mm. CE: In 22 of the 23 examined patients the CE revealed adenomas of the small bowel. Thirteen of these 22 patients also had adenomas in regions not accessible to PE or IL. These adenomas had a maximum size of 10 mm. IL: In 12 of the 25 patients adenomas were found in the region of the ileal pouch. The maximum size of the adenomas was 10 mm. EC: In 19 of the 23 examined patients the EC examination produced a false-negative result. in 8 of these 19 patients the adenomas not detected radiologically measured >or= 10 mm.
FAP patients with duodenal adenomas particularly often have adenomas distal to the duodenum. CE is a safe and convenient method for evaluating the small bowel in these patients. EC is considerably inferior to the endoscopic procedures for evaluation of the small bowel and is therefore not suitable for the diagnosis of adenomas in FAP.
传统上消化道内镜检查(EGD)、带侧视内镜的EGD及回肠镜检查是对家族性腺瘤性息肉病(FAP)患者进行内镜评估的既定方法。然而,对于EGD和回肠镜检查无法触及的小肠部位腺瘤的发生频率及相关性,我们仍知之甚少。十二指肠远端腺瘤在已知患有十二指肠腺瘤的FAP患者中更为常见。问题在于,这些患者是否能从额外的内镜检查和/或影像学检查中获益。
在2001年7月至2006年8月期间,我们对25例已知患有十二指肠腺瘤的FAP患者进行了推进式小肠镜检查(PE)、胶囊内镜检查(CE)、回肠镜检查(IL)和小肠灌肠造影(EC)的对比小肠研究。记录检测到的任何腺瘤的数量、大小和位置。
PE:检查发现25例接受检查的患者中有9例存在需要治疗的十二指肠腺瘤(最大尺寸80mm)。25例患者中有12例的PE显示屈氏韧带远端存在腺瘤,最大尺寸为15mm。CE:23例接受检查的患者中有22例的CE显示小肠存在腺瘤。这22例患者中有13例在PE或IL无法触及的区域也存在腺瘤。这些腺瘤最大尺寸为10mm。IL:25例患者中有12例在回肠袋区域发现腺瘤。腺瘤最大尺寸为10mm。EC:23例接受检查的患者中有19例的EC检查结果为假阴性。这19例患者中有8例未通过影像学检测到的腺瘤尺寸≥10mm。
患有十二指肠腺瘤的FAP患者十二指肠远端尤其常出现腺瘤。CE是评估这些患者小肠的一种安全便捷的方法。EC在评估小肠方面远不如内镜检查方法,因此不适合用于FAP腺瘤的诊断。