Cargando…
Different clinical outcomes in Crohn’s disease patients with esophagogastroduodenal, jejunal, and proximal ileal disease involvement: is L4 truly a single phenotype?
BACKGROUND: The Montreal classification defines L4 Crohn’s disease (CD) as any disease location proximal to the terminal ileum, which anatomically includes L4-esophagogastroduodenal (EGD), L4-jejunal, and L4-proximal ileal involvement. L4-jejunal disease was established to be associated with poor pr...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5990878/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29899757 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1756284818777938 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: The Montreal classification defines L4 Crohn’s disease (CD) as any disease location proximal to the terminal ileum, which anatomically includes L4-esophagogastroduodenal (EGD), L4-jejunal, and L4-proximal ileal involvement. L4-jejunal disease was established to be associated with poor prognosis. However, the outcome of patients with L4-proximal ileal disease or L4-EGD remains to be clarified. Our study aimed to investigate whether the outcome differs among CD patients with L4-EGD, L4-jejunal, and L4-proximal ileal disease. METHODS: In our retrospective cohort study, 483 patients with confirmed CD were included. The primary outcome was intestinal surgery. Demographic features and outcomes were compared among L4-EGD, L4-jejunal, and L4-proximal ileal disease. RESULTS: Thirty-nine (8.1%) patients had isolated L4 disease, whereas 146 patients had L4 as well as concomitant L1, L2, or L3 disease. During a median follow up of 5.8 years, L4 patients were more likely to have intestinal surgeries compared to non-L4 patients (31% versus 16%, p < 0.001). The percentage of L4-jejunal patients who underwent surgery was higher than that of L4-proximal ileal (66% versus 28%, p < 0.001), and both of these subtypes of L4 were at higher risk for intestinal resection compared to L4-EGD patients (66% and 28% versus 9%, respectively, p < 0.001 and p < 0.05). On multi-variable analysis, L4-jejunal (HR 3.08; 95% CI 1.30–7.31) and L4-proximal ileal disease (HR 1.83; 95% CI 1.07–3.15) were independent predictors for intestinal resection. CONCLUSIONS: L4 disease had worse prognosis compared to non-L4 disease. Within L4 disease, phenotype of L4-jejunal and L4-proximal ileal disease indicated higher risk for intestinal surgery. It might be justified to further characterize the L4 phenotype of the Montreal classification into three specific subgroups including L4-EGD, L4-jejunal, and L4-proximal ileal disease, similar to the Paris classification of pediatric patients. |
---|