Skip to main content
. 2019 Jul 18;12:1756284819863015. doi: 10.1177/1756284819863015

Table 1.

Relationship between mucosal healing (MH) and histological healing (HH).

Study Method Disease N patients Mucosal healing
Histological healing
Outcome
Definition N (%) Index score N (%)
Fernandez-Blanco
et al.31
WL UC 34 Mayo score ⩽ 2 21 (62%) Geboes grade ⩽ 3.0 9 (26%) Cohen’s k = 0.293
Bryant et al.39 WL UC 91 Baron score ⩽1 56 (61%) Truelove and Richards’ Index 47 (52%) κ = 0.56
(95% CI 0.36 to 0.77)
Iacucci et al.62 i-scan UC 78 i-scan = 1 5 (6.4%) NYMS = 0 18 (78.3%) r = 0.65
(95%CI 0.49–0.76) p < 0.0001
Uchiyama et al.67 LCI UC 193 areasa LCI A 50 (25.9%) Matts’ grade = 1 47 (24.4%) p = 0.001b
Sasanuma et al.69 NBI UC 52 BV-BB
BV-BH
41 (78%) Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare n/a p < 0.01
Iacucci et al.72 OE UC 41 UC i-scan OE
mucosal 0–1
vascular 0–1
11 (26.8%)
8 (19.5%)
ECAP
RHI
n/a r = 0.70; p < 0.001
r = 0.61; p < 0.01
a

50 patients, calculations are done on the number of areas.

b

LCI index at each Matts’ histopathological grade; ANOVA linear contrast test.

ECAP, extent, chronicity, activity, plus additional findings; LCI, linked colour imaging; NBI, narrow-band imaging; NYMS, New York Mount Sinai system; OE, optical enhancement; RHI, Robarts Histological Index; UC, ulcerative colitis; WL, white light.