ArticleNorthern clinics of Istanbul2021
Calretinin immunohistochemical staining in Hirschsprung's disease: An institutional experience.
Article in Northern clinics of Istanbul, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- In utero rescue of neurological dysfunction in a mouse model of Wiedemann-Steiner syndrome.JCI insight · 2025Article
- Histopathologic Concerns and Diagnostic Challenges in Hirschsprung's Disease: An Eastern European Single-Center Observational Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Full-thickness rectal biopsies in diagnosis of Hirschsprung disease: 13 years of experience of a single center.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2025Article
- Chronic Constipation Unmasking as Hirschsprung Disease in a Preadolescent: Delayed Presentation or Delayed Diagnosis?Cureus · 2024Article
- Clinicopathologic evaluation of congenital idiopathic megaesophagus in a Gordon Setter puppy: a case report and development and application of peripherin immunohistochemistry for detection of ganglion cells.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to evaluate the results obtained by calretinin staining on tissue samples for diagnosing Hirschsprung's disease (HD) in a single institution, by single expert. Methods: A retrospective evaluation was done for calretinin immunostaining in HD patients for a period of 3 years. Calretinin staining was evaluated in nerve fibers. Calretinin immunohistochemistry was considered positive if any staining was seen in nerve fibers and/or ganglion cells in the lamina propria, muscularis mucosa or submucosa. According to staining intensity, staining was classified as strong, weak or negative. The pathological diagnosis was based on presence or absence of ganglion cells (G0/G1) and nerve hypertrophy (N0/N1). Samples were classified according to the depth (presence of submucosa or intermuscular area), the type (biopsy or resection specimen) and staining intensity of calretinin (strong, weak, or negative staining). Results: A total of 96 tissue samples from 56 patients were studied. Tissues were from colon (43.8%), rectum (43.8%), stoma (6.2%), ileum (3.1%) and appendix (3.1%). The pathological diagnosis was G0N0 in 14.6%, G1N0 in 54.2%, G0N1 in 25% and G1N1 in 6.2% of cases. Our materials consisted of 92 tissue biopsies and four resection specimens. Intermuscular layer was present in 87.5% of materials and 12.5% of biopsies contained submucosa. Calretinin staining was negative (C0) in 37.5% of cases, strong positive (C1) in 47.9%, and weak positive (C2) in 14.6%. When the C0 category was taken as the reference, the status of calretinin staining as C2 (weak positive) in cases with pathological diagnosis of G1N0 was found to be 37.575 times that of cases with G0N0 (OR [95% CI]: 37.575 [2.928, 482.176], p=0.006) and the status of calretinin staining as C1 (strong positive) in cases with pathologic diagnosis of G1N0 was found to be 131.401 times that of G0N0 (OR [95% CI]: 131.401 [9.263, 1864.082), p<0.001). Conclusion: Calretinin staining is positive whenever ganglion cells are present independent from presence of nerve hypertrophy, the depth and the site of the biopsy or staining intensity. It is negative in all aganglionic samples. Calretinin staining is a reliable ancillary test in HD diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.