Cargando…

The misclassification of gastric antral vascular ectasia

BACKGROUND: Gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) is characterized by angiodysplastic lesions and is a rare form of gastrointestinal bleeding. Given the multiple patterns, GAVE can be misclassified. AIM: We analyzed the misclassification of GAVE among patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aryan, Mahmoud, Jariwala, Ravi, Alkurdi, Basem, Peter, Shajan, Shoreibah, Mohamed
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Whioce Publishing Pte. Ltd. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9260348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35813901
_version_ 1784742007066853376
author Aryan, Mahmoud
Jariwala, Ravi
Alkurdi, Basem
Peter, Shajan
Shoreibah, Mohamed
author_facet Aryan, Mahmoud
Jariwala, Ravi
Alkurdi, Basem
Peter, Shajan
Shoreibah, Mohamed
author_sort Aryan, Mahmoud
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) is characterized by angiodysplastic lesions and is a rare form of gastrointestinal bleeding. Given the multiple patterns, GAVE can be misclassified. AIM: We analyzed the misclassification of GAVE among patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 941 EGDs between 2017 and 2019. Inclusion criteria included findings of GAVE on EGD±biopsy. Correct classification was based on visual EGD findings. Outcome variables included misclassification rate, endoscopist’s background, and concordance between EGD and pathology. Cohen’s Kappa test was used for concordance analysis. RESULTS: A total of 110 patients had EGD findings of GAVE with a corresponding 184 EGDs. The misclassification rate among EGDs was 74/184 (40%). Furthermore, 81/110 patients were correctly classified with their first workup, whereas 29/110 patients needed repeat testing. In cases of misclassification, GAVE was mostly referred to as erythema (43%), with ulceration, gastritis, or polyps. Sixty-six (60%) patients had biopsies with a concordance of 76% between EGD and biopsy (κ=0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate GAVE was misclassified up to 40% on EGDs with hepatologists and gastroenterologists having similar misclassification rates. Proper identification is crucial given susceptibility to upper gastrointestinal bleeding. RELEVANCE FOR PATIENTS: This study emphasizes the importance of accurate classification of GAVE to ensure proper treatment of these lesions which can improve clinical outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9260348
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Whioce Publishing Pte. Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92603482022-07-07 The misclassification of gastric antral vascular ectasia Aryan, Mahmoud Jariwala, Ravi Alkurdi, Basem Peter, Shajan Shoreibah, Mohamed J Clin Transl Res Original Article BACKGROUND: Gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) is characterized by angiodysplastic lesions and is a rare form of gastrointestinal bleeding. Given the multiple patterns, GAVE can be misclassified. AIM: We analyzed the misclassification of GAVE among patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 941 EGDs between 2017 and 2019. Inclusion criteria included findings of GAVE on EGD±biopsy. Correct classification was based on visual EGD findings. Outcome variables included misclassification rate, endoscopist’s background, and concordance between EGD and pathology. Cohen’s Kappa test was used for concordance analysis. RESULTS: A total of 110 patients had EGD findings of GAVE with a corresponding 184 EGDs. The misclassification rate among EGDs was 74/184 (40%). Furthermore, 81/110 patients were correctly classified with their first workup, whereas 29/110 patients needed repeat testing. In cases of misclassification, GAVE was mostly referred to as erythema (43%), with ulceration, gastritis, or polyps. Sixty-six (60%) patients had biopsies with a concordance of 76% between EGD and biopsy (κ=0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate GAVE was misclassified up to 40% on EGDs with hepatologists and gastroenterologists having similar misclassification rates. Proper identification is crucial given susceptibility to upper gastrointestinal bleeding. RELEVANCE FOR PATIENTS: This study emphasizes the importance of accurate classification of GAVE to ensure proper treatment of these lesions which can improve clinical outcomes. Whioce Publishing Pte. Ltd. 2022-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9260348/ /pubmed/35813901 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Author(s). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, permitting all noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Aryan, Mahmoud
Jariwala, Ravi
Alkurdi, Basem
Peter, Shajan
Shoreibah, Mohamed
The misclassification of gastric antral vascular ectasia
title The misclassification of gastric antral vascular ectasia
title_full The misclassification of gastric antral vascular ectasia
title_fullStr The misclassification of gastric antral vascular ectasia
title_full_unstemmed The misclassification of gastric antral vascular ectasia
title_short The misclassification of gastric antral vascular ectasia
title_sort misclassification of gastric antral vascular ectasia
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9260348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35813901
work_keys_str_mv AT aryanmahmoud themisclassificationofgastricantralvascularectasia
AT jariwalaravi themisclassificationofgastricantralvascularectasia
AT alkurdibasem themisclassificationofgastricantralvascularectasia
AT petershajan themisclassificationofgastricantralvascularectasia
AT shoreibahmohamed themisclassificationofgastricantralvascularectasia
AT aryanmahmoud misclassificationofgastricantralvascularectasia
AT jariwalaravi misclassificationofgastricantralvascularectasia
AT alkurdibasem misclassificationofgastricantralvascularectasia
AT petershajan misclassificationofgastricantralvascularectasia
AT shoreibahmohamed misclassificationofgastricantralvascularectasia