Writer, I'm not sure what you mean by "no GI can ever tell you definitively that you have UC vs CD, I don't think that's accurate, when CD is affecting the colon it generally does have a different appearance compared to UC", skipped patterns of inflammation with CD compared to the entire area with UC and typically with UC the inflamation is surfaceable only, with CD it can go through the many layers of the intestinal lining...I was DX easily mainly because of my perianal crohn's skin tags, but at my DX my CD was also affecting my rectom, colon and TI and my GI said my pattern of inflammation in my colon and rectom (where UC typically hangs out) were very obviously CD-looking.
What I find strange is how so many are misDX and so many are DX as having indeterminant colitis (when a GI just can't tell which it is), I know that there is a small percentage (aprox 2%) that do have both UC and CD but to get that DX means they have pretty concrete proof, which would be in the form that inflammation in the colon would affect the entire area with no skipped patterns and remain on the surface of the lining only when at the same time inflammation in the TI or any part of the small bowel shows the typical CD pattern, not to mention, UC wouldn't show up higher in the small intestine as CD would.
I also know that many CDers get confused when their GI's mention the word colitis, as it tends to automatically make the patient think they also have UC when infact they have CD affecting the colon, but many docs are not clear with their CD patients when their docs find CD activity in the colon and tell their patient they have colitis as well (which doesn't mean ulcerative colitis)....col=colon and itis=inflammation be it from either UC or CD.
My bum is broken....there's a big crack down the middle of it! LOL :)
Post Edited (pb4) : 4/20/2009 7:32:04 PM (GMT-6)