Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
INTRODUCTION: Chronic intestinal pseudoobstruction (CIPO) is classified into enteric visceral myopathies, neuropathies, and/or mesenchymopathies. Although the histology usually permits to highlight pathologic abnormalities of CIPO, it fails in almost a third of cases. The yield of a systematic immunohistochemistry needs to be evaluating. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one adult patients with idiopathic CIPO [11 females/10 males, median age 23.1 (0.3 to 57) y] were included and compared with 27 control and 10 with mechanical obstruction patients. Comparison between standard histology (hematoxylin and eosin-stained sections) and systematic immunohistochemistry using muscular (smooth muscle alpha-actin, desmin, and smoothelin-A/B), nervous (Hu C/D, Bcl-2, and S100 protein), and mesenchymal (CD117) markers was carried out. RESULTS: Histology showed neuromuscular abnormalities in 13 out of 21 (62%) patients, consisting of enteric visceral myopathy in 9 (43%) patients, enteric visceral neuropathy in 2 (9.5%), and mixed neuromyopathy in 2 (9.5%). Among the 8 patients who had no histologic structural abnormality, 6 patients (75%) had underlying abnormalities detected with immunohistochemistry: immunostain with Hu C/D detected a hypoganglionosis (<50 ganglion cells/cm) in 6 out of 21 (29%) patients, 4 of them undiagnosed on standard histology; CD117 (c-kit) detected a interstitial cells of Cajal defect in 10 out of 21 (48%) patients, 2 of them with no histologic structural abnormality. Smoothelin-A/B and desmin were useless as normally expressed in all patients with no myopathy; although it was not relevant in ileal samples (86% of abnormal expression in control patients), smooth muscle alpha-actin showed an abnormal expression in 2 CIPO patients (2/21). CONCLUSIONS: Immunohistochemistry using Hu C/D and CD117 antibodies combined to the standard histology increased the yield of detection of neuromuscular abnormalities in idiopathic CIPO patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amiot et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: