The Lewis score or the capsule endoscopy Crohn’s disease activity index: which one is better for the assessment of small bowel inflammation in established Crohn’s disease?

Background Small-bowel capsule endoscopy (CE) is a prime modality for evaluation of the small bowel. The Lewis score (LS) and the Capsule Endoscopy Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CECDAI) are validated endoscopic indices for quantification of small-bowel inflammation on CE. It is unclear whether these indexes are interchangeable for the evaluation of mucosal inflammation in established Crohn’s disease (CD). The aim of this study was to compare the quantitative evaluation of small- bowel inflammation by LS and CECDAI. Methods Patients with known quiescent small-bowel CD for at least 3 months (Crohn’s disease activity index 9.2 corresponded to moderate-to-severe inflammation (LS ⩾ 790). There was a moderate correlation between capsule scores and FCP levels ( r = 0.39, p = 0.002 for LS, r = 0.48, p = 0.001 for C-LS, and r = 0.53, p = 0.001 for CECDAI, respectively). CRP levels were not significantly correlated with either score. Conclusions CECDAI and C-LS are strongly correlated and perform similarly for quantitative assessment of mucosal inflammation in established CD

Middle small-bowel segment Lewis score may predict long-term outcomes among patients with quiescent Crohn’s disease

Background: Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) has been proven to accurately diagnose small-bowel inflammation and predict flares among patients with quiescent Crohn’s disease (CD). However, data regarding its predictive role in this population over an extended follow-up are scarce. Objectives: To predict clinical exacerbation and to assess the yield of Lewis score in identifying CD patients with future clinical exacerbation during an extended follow-up (>24 months). Design: A post hoc analysis study. Methods: Adult patients with quiescent small-bowel CD who were followed with VCE, inflammatory biomarkers and magnetic resonance enterography in a prospective study (between 2013 and 2018). We extracted extended clinical data (up to April 2022). The primary composite outcome (i.e. clinical exacerbation) was defined as intestinal surgery, endoscopic dilation, CD-related admission, corticosteroid administration, or biological/immunomodulator treatment change during follow-up. Results: Of the 61 patients in the study [median age 29 (24–37) years, male 57.4%, biologic treatment 46.7%], 18 patients met the primary outcome during an extended follow-up [median 58.0 (34.5–93.0) months]. On univariable analysis, complicated [hazard ratio (HR) 7.348, p  = 0.002] and stricturing disease phenotype (HR 5.305, p  = 0.001) were associated with higher risk for clinical exacerbation during follow-up. A baseline VCE middle small-bowel segment Lewis score (midLS) ⩾ 135 identified patients with future exacerbation [AUC (area under the curve) 0.767, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.633–0.902, p  = 0.001, HR 6.317, 93% negative predictive value], whereas the AUC of the conventional Lewis score was 0.734 (95% CI: 0.589–0.879, p  = 0.004). Sensitivity analysis restricted to patients with either complicated ( n  = 34) or stricturing ( n  = 26) disease phenotype revealed that midLS still predicted clinical exacerbation during follow-up (AUC 0.747/0.753, respectively), in these patients. Conclusion: MidLS predicts treatment failure in quiescent CD patients (median follow-up of 5 years) independently of disease phenotype