Search

OBJECTIVE The aim of the study was to systematically review the diagnostic utility of serum biomarkers for the diagnosis of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). METHODS We conducted an electronic and manual search of the available evidence. We included studies reporting data on the diagnostic accuracy of "serum" biomarkers for the diagnosis of NEC, available until January 2016. RESULTS We selected 22 studies from the 1296 articles retrieved. Only S100 A8/A9 protein and apolipoprotein-CII showed high sensitivity (100% and 96.4%, respectively) and specificity (90% and 95%, respectively) in the studies using Bell stage II NEC as target condition. High sensitivity and specificity were reported for interleukin-10 (100% and 90%), interleukin1-receptor antagonist (100% and 91.7%), intestinal fatty acid-binding protein (100% and 91%) and ischemia-modified albumin (94.7% and 92%), when tested to predict the evolution from definite to advanced NEC. Given the amount of uncertainty, the limited availability of data and heterogeneity among the populations in the different studies, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Major concerns about the applicability stemmed from the spectrum of patients enrolled and the inclusion of diseases different from Bell stage ≥2 NEC as target conditions. CONCLUSIONS We identified only few markers with good diagnostic accuracy and found an overall low quality of the studies on serum NEC biomarkers. In conclusion, data supporting their use are insufficient.

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are lifelong inflammatory gastrointestinal diseases starting in about one third of patients during childhood. Treatment strategies aim to control this chronic inflammatory process. Owing to recent advances in the understanding of IBD, immunosuppressive agents (mainly against TNFalpha directed) as well as biological drugs are more and more often used. This therapeutic approach clearly improved the clinical condition of the majority of patients with IBD. However, with this more aggressive treatment strategy, safety concerns clearly arise. Recently, the description of a series of a particularly severe form of T cell lymphoma in pediatric and young adult patients with IBD under immunomodulator and biological combination therapy raised the question of the risks of treatment-induced side effects or complications. As reviewed in the present article, there is a slightly increased risk of not only lymphoma development in IBD patients, potentially related to the inflammatory process, but also to the use of immunosuppressive therapies. On the basis of the literature data, were analyzed current treatment strategies for children with moderate-to-severe IBD, who are candidates to receive immunomodulator and/or biological agents potentially accelerating the risk of lymphoma development. Comparative clinical studies in IBD are still missing; however, it is prudent to think about adapting immunosuppressive therapies to the inflammatory process of the underlying disorder and if possible to reduce them to monotherapy. Alternative treatment strategies for heavy immunosuppression exist (eg, enteral nutrition in Crohn disease or colectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis) and should be considered whenever appropriate. There is a major need for comparative studies before evidence-based guidelines can be established for safest and best treatment strategies of pediatric patients with IBD.