Editorial
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Gastroenterol. May 21, 2015; 21(19): 5762-5767
Published online May 21, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i19.5762
Table 1 Histological criteria for the assessment of microscopic lesions described by Yerian et al[28]
CriterionDefinition and method of assessment (magnification)Severity score
Basal cell hyperplasiaMeasure basal cell layer in μm and express as a proportion of total epithelial thickness (× 10)0 (absent < 15%), 1 (15%-30%), 2 (> 30%)
Papillary elongationMeasure papillary length in μm and express as a proportion (%) of total epithelial thickness (× 10)0 (absent < 50%), 1 (50%-75%), 2 (> 75%)
Dilated intercellular spacesInclude irregular round dilations and diffuse widening of the intercellular space (× 40)0 ( ≤ 5 small), 1 (≥ 6 small and ≤ 5 large) 2 (≥ 6 large)
Small intercellular space= diameter < 1 lymphocyte
Large intercellular spaces = diameter ≥ 1 lymphocyte
Intraepithelial eosinophilsCount cells in the most affected power field (× 40)0 (0 cells in one high power field)
Intraepithelial neutrophils1 (1-2 cells), 2 (> 2 cells)
IntraepithelialCount cells in the most affected power field (× 40)0 (0-9 cells)
mononuclear cells1 (10-30 cells), 2 (> 30 cells)
ErosionsAssess as presence of at least one of the following: necrosis, granulation tissue or fibrin with neutrophils (× 10)0 (absent), 1 (present)
Healed erosionsAssess as presence of granulation tissue covered by thinned regenerative epithelium (× 10) in the absence of necrosis, fibrin, and neutrophils0 (absent), 1 (present)
Combined severity scoreSum of lesion severity scores divided by the number of lesions assessed (excludes intraepithelial monuclear cells and neutrophils, and erosions/healed erosions)
0-0.25 normal mucosa, 0.5-0.75 mild esophagitis
≥ 1 severe esophagitis
Table 2 Histological score applied by Savarino et al[7]
CriterionDefinition and method of assessmentSeverity score
(magnification)
Basal cell hyperplasiaMeasure basal cell layer in μm and express as a proportion of total epithelial thickness (× 10)0 (absent < 15%), 1 (15%-30%), 2 (> 30%). Z line 1 (> 20%)
Papillary elongationMeasure papillary length in μm and express as a proportion (%) of total epithelial thickness0 (absent < 50%), 1 (50%-75%), 2 (> 75%) Z line 1 (> 66%)
Dilated intercellular spacesInclude irregular round dilations or diffuse widening of the intercellular space (× 40)0 ( ≤ 5 small), 1 (≥ 6 small and ≤ 5 large) 2 (≥ 6 large)
Small intercellular space= diameter < 1 lymphocyte
Large intercellular spaces= diameter ≥ 1 lymphocyte
IntraepithelialCount cells in the most affected power field (× 40)0 (0 cells in one high power field)
eosinophils1 (1 cell), 2 (> 1 cells)
Intraepithelial neutrophilsCount cells in the most affected power field (× 40)0 (absent), 2 (present)
Erosions/necrosisAssess as presence of at least one of the following: necrosis, granulation tissue or fibrin within neutrophils (× 10)0 (absent), 2 (present)
Combined severity scoreSum of lesion severity scores divided by the number of lesions assessed. Erosions/necrosis are not counted for the global score
Positive for microscopic esophagitis when the value was ≥ 0.35
Table 3 Histological score applied by Kandulski et al[8]
Type of LesionNo changesMild changesModerate changesSevere changes
Basal cell hyperplasia0123
Papillary elongation0123
Dilated intercellular spaces0123
Inflammation0123
Sum scoreA cut-off value > 5 points was applied for discrimination between NERD and FH