Background/Aims Diagnosis of cytomegalovirus (CMV) ileocolitis traditionally requires colonoscopy with tissue biopsy. Due to potential complications in high-risk patients, there is growing interest in serum and stool tests for diagnosing this condition. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of these noninvasive tests compared to traditional gold standards.
Methods Two independent reviewers performed a comprehensive search on MEDLINE and Embase from inception up to October 1, 2023. Prospective and retrospective studies evaluating the performance of serum CMV polymerase chain reaction (PCR), serum CMV antigen (Ag), and stool CMV PCR in diagnosing CMV ileocolitis were included. Tissue histopathology or tissue CMV PCR served as reference standards. Diagnostic performances of each serum and stool test were calculated based on a meta-analysis using random-effects model.
Results A total of 30 studies, comprising 23 studies of serum CMV PCR, 9 of serum CMV Ag, and 7 of stool CMV PCR, were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under summary receiver operating characteristic curves were 62% (95% confidence interval [CI], 51%–72%), 90% (95% CI, 79%–96%), and 0.81 for serum CMV PCR, 38% (95% CI, 26%–51%), 94% (95% CI, 70%–99%), and 0.56 for serum CMV Ag, and 53% (95% CI, 35%–70%), 91% (95% CI, 84%–95%), and 0.84 for stool CMV PCR.
Conclusions Serum and stool tests cannot replace colonoscopy for diagnosing CMV ileocolitis due to their low sensitivities but may be useful when colonoscopy is not feasible. Positive results can aid diagnosis, given their high specificities. Serum and/or stool CMV PCR are preferred over CMV Ag.
Background/Aims Recently, histological mucosal assessment has gained momentum as a potential new treatment target for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in the Asia-Pacific region. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the knowledge and acceptability of histological assessment among gastroenterologists across the region.
Methods A cross-sectional survey among gastroenterologists in the Asia-Pacific region was conducted and compared against a previous Australian survey. The questionnaire assessed knowledge and attitude towards the role and application of histology in IBD practice. Statistical analyses were employed to compare scores and identify predictors.
Results A total of 221 gastroenterologists from 12 countries, including 77 (34.8%) from Australia, responded to questionnaire, with 185 (83.7%) completing the survey. The mean knowledge score was 9.8 ± 3.3 (51.6%). There was no significant difference in the average score among countries (P= 0.53). IBD specialist (P< 0.01), doctoral degree (P= 0.02), and regular participation in IBD multidisciplinary meetings (P= 0.01) were associated with higher scores. Most respondents (90.7%) agreed on the importance of histology in IBD. While 54.6% of Australians perceived the role of histology as established, only 37.0% of Asians respondents considered this similarly (P= 0.02). Histological activity alone minimally influences treatment escalation in patients with endoscopic remission, but achieving combined histo-endoscopic remission often leads to therapy de-escalation.
Conclusions Although gastroenterologists in the Asia-Pacific region are aware of the role of histology in IBD, their knowledge remains limited, and its clinical utility is not widely adopted. There is a need to promote the routine use of standardized histological assessment in IBD practice.