48,830
edits
Difference between revisions of "Esophagus"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Microscopic: w
m (→Microscopic: w) |
|||
| Line 386: | Line 386: | ||
Notes "abundant eosinophils": | Notes "abundant eosinophils": | ||
*Criteria for number of eosinophils/area is '''''highly variable'''''; there is a 23X fold variation in published values and only 11% of studies actually define an area (most studies, embarassing for pathologists that understand this issue, only give the number of eosinophils per "HPF")!<ref name=pmid17617209>{{cite journal |author=Dellon ES, Aderoju A, Woosley JT, Sandler RS, Shaheen NJ |title=Variability in diagnostic criteria for eosinophilic esophagitis: a systematic review |journal=Am. J. Gastroenterol. |volume=102 |issue=10 |pages=2300–13 |year=2007 |month=October |pmid=17617209 |doi=10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01396.x |url=}}</ref> | *Criteria for number of eosinophils/area is '''''highly variable'''''; there is a 23X fold variation in published values and only 11% of studies actually define an area (most studies, embarassing for pathologists that understand this issue, only give the number of eosinophils per "HPF")!<ref name=pmid17617209>{{cite journal |author=Dellon ES, Aderoju A, Woosley JT, Sandler RS, Shaheen NJ |title=Variability in diagnostic criteria for eosinophilic esophagitis: a systematic review |journal=Am. J. Gastroenterol. |volume=102 |issue=10 |pages=2300–13 |year=2007 |month=October |pmid=17617209 |doi=10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01396.x |url=}}</ref> | ||
**Interrater variability is low, i.e. good, if the procedure standardized.<ref name=pmid19830560>{{Cite journal | last1 = Dellon | first1 = ES. | last2 = Fritchie | first2 = KJ. | last3 = Rubinas | first3 = TC. | last4 = Woosley | first4 = JT. | last5 = Shaheen | first5 = NJ. | title = Inter- and intraobserver reliability and validation of a new method for determination of eosinophil counts in patients with esophageal eosinophilia. | journal = Dig Dis Sci | volume = 55 | issue = 7 | pages = 1940-9 | month = Jul | year = 2010 | doi = 10.1007/s10620-009-1005-z | PMID = 19830560 }}</ref> | **Interrater variability is low, i.e. good, if the procedure is standardized.<ref name=pmid19830560>{{Cite journal | last1 = Dellon | first1 = ES. | last2 = Fritchie | first2 = KJ. | last3 = Rubinas | first3 = TC. | last4 = Woosley | first4 = JT. | last5 = Shaheen | first5 = NJ. | title = Inter- and intraobserver reliability and validation of a new method for determination of eosinophil counts in patients with esophageal eosinophilia. | journal = Dig Dis Sci | volume = 55 | issue = 7 | pages = 1940-9 | month = Jul | year = 2010 | doi = 10.1007/s10620-009-1005-z | PMID = 19830560 }}</ref> | ||
*The most commonly reported cut points are 15, 20 and 24 eosinophils/HPF, without defining HPF.<ref name=pmid17617209/> | *The most commonly reported cut points are 15, 20 and 24 eosinophils/HPF, without defining HPF.<ref name=pmid17617209/> | ||
**The ''Foundation Series'' book<ref name=Ref_GLP19>{{Ref GLP|19}}</ref> says: "> 20/HPF"; ''[[onlinepathology]]'' sees this definition as garbage, as "HPF" is not defined (see [[HPFitis]]). | **The ''Foundation Series'' book<ref name=Ref_GLP19>{{Ref GLP|19}}</ref> says: "> 20/HPF"; ''[[onlinepathology]]'' sees this definition as garbage, as "HPF" is not defined (see [[HPFitis]]). | ||