Beyond complete endoscopic healing: Goblet appearance using an endocytoscope to predict future sustained clinical remission in ulcerative colitis

• Published in: Digestive endoscopy Vol. 34; no. 5; pp. 1030 - 1039
• Main Authors: Takishima, Kazumi, Maeda, Yasuharu, Ogata, Noriyuki, Misawa, Masashi, Mori, Yuichi, Homma, Mayumi, Nemoto, Tetsuo, Miyata, Yuki, Akimoto, Yoshika, Mochida, Kentaro, Takashina, Yuki, Tanaka, Kenta, Ichimasa, Katsuro, Nakamura, Hiroki, Sasanuma, Seiko, Kudo, Toyoki, Hayashi, Takemasa, Wakamura, Kunihiko, Miyachi, Hideyuki, Baba, Toshiyuki, Ishida, Fumio, Ohtsuka, Kazuo, Kudo, Shin‐ei
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Australia 01.07.2022
• Subjects: histologic remission; microscopic endoscopy; treat to target; ulcerative colitis; microscopic endoscopy; treat to target; ulcerative colitis; histologic remission
• ISSN: 0915-5635; 1443-1661; 1443-1661
• DOI: 10.1111/den.14202

Objectives Complete endoscopic healing, defined as Mayo endoscopic score (MES) = 0, is an optimal target in the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). However, some patients with MES = 0 show clinical relapse within 12 months. Histologic goblet mucin depletion has emerged as a predictor of clinical relapse in patients with MES = 0. We observed goblet depletion in vivo using an endocytoscope, and analyzed the association between goblet appearance and future prognosis in UC patients. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, all enrolled UC patients had MES = 0 and confirmed clinical remission between October 2016 and March 2020. We classified the patients into two groups according to the goblet appearance status: preserved‐goblet and depleted‐goblet groups. We followed the patients until March 2021 and evaluated the difference in cumulative clinical relapse rates between the two groups. Results We identified 125 patients with MES = 0 as the study subjects. Five patients were subsequently excluded. Thus, we analyzed the data for 120 patients, of whom 39 were classified as the preserved‐goblet group and 81 as the depleted‐goblet group. The patients were followed‐up for a median of 549 days. During follow‐up, the depleted‐goblet group had a significantly higher cumulative clinical relapse rate than the preserved‐goblet group (19% [15/81] vs. 5% [2/39], respectively; P = 0.02). Conclusions Observing goblet appearance in vivo allowed us to better predict the future prognosis of UC patients with MES = 0. This approach may assist clinicians with onsite decision‐making regarding treatment interventions without a biopsy.