Published online Oct 16, 2020. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v12.i10.341
Peer-review started: July 23, 2020
First decision: August 22, 2020
Revised: August 28, 2020
Accepted: September 8, 2020
Article in press: September 8, 2020
Published online: October 16, 2020
Processing time: 83 Days and 22.6 Hours
Gastrointestinal (GI) graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) is the most common complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) and is often diagnosed via endoscopy with biopsy.
Limited data exists on optimal endoscopic strategy and safety for GVHD evaluation in cancer patients who have had HSCT.
To create a strategy of endoscopic approach based on symptoms, gross endoscopic findings, and biopsy location as well as understand the safety of endoscopy in acute GVHD (aGVHD) patients.
We analyzed 195 endoscopies performed at City of Hope in patients who underwent HSCT for hematological malignancy and were evaluated for aGVHD.
Evaluation using combined esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) demonstrated a greater diagnostic yield for aGVHD (83.1%) compared to EGD (66.7%) or FS (77.2%) alone in patients with any presenting symptom. Biopsies obtained from either the upper or lower GI tract, specifically the rectosigmoid colon, demonstrated comparably high yields in patients with diarrhea (95.7% vs 99.1%) or nausea/vomiting (97.5% vs 96.8%). Normal-appearing mucosa was generally as specific (91.3%) for the presence of aGVHD on biopsy as the presence of endoscopic abnormalities (58.7%-97.8%), however sensitivity was low. Adverse events occurred in a small proportion of patients, including bleeding (1.0%), infection (1.0%), and perforation (0.5%). There was no significant difference in occurrence of adverse events in thrombocytopenic compared to non-thrombocytopenic patients (P = 1.000) and neutropenic compared to non-neutropenic patients (P = 0.425).
Combined EGD and FS with biopsy of the stomach and rectosigmoid colon results in the greatest diagnostic yield for most patients referred for evaluation of aGVHD, independent of symptoms. Biopsy of normal appearing mucosa is warranted, and endoscopic evidence of severe inflammation is specific for more histologically severe GVHD. In resource limited settings, or in patients with high risk for sedation related complications, FS with rectosigmoid biopsies may be an appropriate approach given reasonable yield for detection of aGVHD. Our study also found no significant difference in adverse events between thrombocytopenic and neutropenic patients, confirming the safety of endoscopy in this patient population.
Future, larger, controlled studies are needed to control for confounders and more accurately model the risk associated with endoscopy in the thrombocytopenic and neutropenic groups.