Intestinal Spirochetosis: An Enigmatic Disease

Abstract

Introduction

Intestinal spirochetosis (IS) is a condition in which colonic and appendiceal epithelial cells are colonized by one of two anaerobic spirochetes, either the Brachyspira aalborgi or Brachyspira pilosicoli. There is much debate in the literature as to whether IS is a pathogen or a commensal inhabitant. A recent case of IS at our institution prompted a retrospective database search and review of the literature.

Methods

A pathology database search for IS was performed at Carolinas Medical Center from 2003 through 2007. After patient identification, a retrospective review of the endoscopic record and the pathology report was performed. Pathology slides were reviewed for accuracy and special silver stains and/or immunostains were performed if needed. The following data were collected for each patient when available: age, gender, nationality, HIV status, and other co-morbid conditions when noted. We attempted to determine whether patients were treated for spirochetosis and if so, the treatment regimen used as well as the results.

Results

The database search detected 29 patients with biopsies showing IS. Three patients were subsequently removed due to incorrect identification. A total of 26 patients with an average age of 45 years were reviewed. The most common symptoms were abdominal pain, diarrhea, and rectal bleeding. Most patients did not exhibit inflammatory changes despite the presence of spirochetosis. Pathologic examination revealed a relative increase in intra-epithelial lymphocytes in a subset of cases, a non-specific finding. Acute colitis or architectural distortion was not seen in any of the study cases. We were only able to obtain follow-up of two patients after treatment with metronidazole and both responded to therapy.

Conclusions

To date, our study is the largest case series that includes both endoscopic and pathologic descriptions and confirms the “bland” nature of the condition. In <20 % of our patients inflammation was present microscopically and it did not correlate well with endoscopic appearance. Symptoms reported by our patients were similar to those reported in previous studies, although our lack of endoscopic changes was different from one previous paper. There is no established standard of care for the treatment of IS and our study, reflects the enigmatic nature of IS as a disease process. In the absence of rigorous literature, physicians will need to use a logical and pragmatic approach to the evaluation and treatment of IS.