Mayo Endoscopic Score and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index Are Equally Effective for Endoscopic Activity Evaluation in Ulcerative Colitis Patients in a Real Life Setting

• Main Authors: Cristiano Pagnini, Maria Carla Di Paolo, Benedetta Maria Mariani, Riccardo Urgesi, Lorella Pallotta, Mario Alessandro Vitale, Giuseppe Villotti, Lucia d’Alba, Maria Assunta De Cesare, Emilio Di Giulio, Maria Giovanna Graziani
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: MDPI AG 2021-05-01
• Series: Gastroenterology Insights
• Subjects: ulcerative colitis; endoscopy; endoscopic scores; Mayo Endoscopic Score; Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity; interobserver agreement
• Online Access: https://www.mdpi.com/2036-7422/12/2/19

The role of endoscopic evaluation in ulcerative colitis (UC) is well recognized, but a universally accepted gold standard for endoscopic activity evaluation is still lacking, and many scores have been proposed to this purpose. Among these, the Mayo Endoscopic Score (MES) and the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index (UCEIS) are currently the most used in trials and clinical practice. The aim of the study is to evaluate feasibility and performance of MES and UCEIS among expert endoscopists with no specific expertise in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), in a single hospital center. Two minutes video recordings, from colonoscopy of 12 UC patients, were observed and scored, according to MES and UCEIS, by seven hospital gastroenterologists with experience in digestive endoscopy and no particular expertise in IBD. Knowledge and utilization of the two scores were investigated. Inter-observer agreement and agreement with an IBD-expert gastroenterologist of the same center (central reader), and correlation between the two scores, was calculated. Among the endoscopists, MES was much more known and currently used than UCEIS. Both the scores displayed a similar good performance. Agreement with central reader was moderate for MES and UCEIS, and interobserver agreement was good, for both MES and UCEIS. Correlation between the two scores was very good both for central reader and for the hospital endoscopists. This single center study confirmed potential feasibility and usefulness of MES and UCEIS for assessment of endoscopic activity in UC patients in a real-life setting.