v
Search
Advanced

Publications > Journals > Journal of Translational Gastroenterology> Article Full Text

  • OPEN ACCESS

Unmasking Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Nigeria: A Multicenter Cross-sectional Analysis of Clinico-pathological and Endoscopic Findings

  • Yusuf Musa1,*,
  • Habib Tijjani Saleh1,
  • Chinwe Philomena Onyia2,
  • Abubakar Sadiq Aminu1,
  • Kenechukwu Chukwuemeka Okonkwo3,
  • Oluwafunmilayo Funke Adeniyi4,
  • Abdulkareem Lukman Olaitan5,
  • Hafizu Abdullahi Zubairu1,
  • Nasiru Altine Dankiri6,
  • Muhammad Manko7,
  • Matthew Olumuyiwa Bojuwoye8,
  • Owoseni Opeyemi Olubukola9,
  • Emuobor Odeghe10,
  • Yusuf Shehu Umar11,
  • Ganiyat Kikelomo Oyeleke10,
  • Isa Mustapha12,
  • Chinenye Unoma Nwoko13 and
  • Evaristus Sunday Chukwudike14
 Author information 

Abstract

Background and objectives

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic condition with significant health implications worldwide. In Nigeria, data on its prevalence and characteristics are limited, highlighting the need for comprehensive studies to better understand its epidemiology and clinical features in the region. This study aimed to assess the clinical presentation, endoscopic findings, and management challenges of IBD among patients undergoing colonoscopy in Nigeria.

Methods

Over five years (2019–2024), a multicenter, cross-sectional survey was conducted involving clinicians across Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones. It included a retrospective review of records from 18 centers. Data collection was conducted in two phases via Google Forms, focusing on care practices and detailed case information, including demographics, clinical features, histology, and treatment. Data analysis used descriptive statistics and tests for associations, with significance set at p < 0.05.

Results

A total of 459 suspected IBD cases (9.7%) were identified among over 4,700 colonoscopies, with histological confirmation in 208 cases (4.4%), indicating the prevalence of IBD in the Nigerian patient population. The most common subtype was ulcerative colitis (53.9%), followed by Crohn’s disease (21.0%) and indeterminate colitis (25.0%). Regional variations were observed, with higher diagnosis rates in some zones (North-West: 14.9%; South-East: 1.4%). The predominant clinical feature was rectal bleeding. Endoscopic findings frequently showed pan-colitis (62%), with significant regional differences (p < 0.001), and management mainly involved medications such as acetylsalicylic acid derivatives (60.0%), with surgical options rarely employed (0.6%). Challenges included high medication costs and limited availability, which affected nearly half of the patients (49.4%; 46.2%).

Conclusions

IBD, though under-recognized, is present in the Nigerian population, with notable regional variation in prevalence and presentation. The primary clinical features align with global patterns, and significant barriers, such as medication costs and availability, hinder effective management. Increasing awareness, improving diagnostic infrastructure, and addressing treatment challenges are essential to enhance care and outcomes for patients with IBD in Nigeria.

Keywords

Inflammatory bowel disease, Ulcerative colitis, Crohn’s disease, Colonoscopy, Histology, Pancolitis, Anorectal disease, Proctitis, Stricturing, Fistulation

Introduction

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic inflammatory condition affecting the gastrointestinal tract, resulting from a complex interplay between an imbalance in the mucosal inflammatory response, gut microbiota dysbiosis, and a genetically predisposed host. It is characterized by the accumulation of myriad inflammatory mediators.1

The main forms of IBD are ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD). While UC typically affects the large bowel, CD can involve any section of the gastrointestinal tract.1,2 Although it can be asymptomatic, manifestations like abdominal pain, diarrhea, rectal bleeding, fever, and weight loss significantly impair quality of life.1,2 The disease is lifelong, often emerging in children and young adults, with no current cure available. Research indicates bimodal peaks in incidence: the first peak in young adults and the second between 50 and 60 years.3 Complications include infections, intestinal obstructions, frequent surgeries, and an increased risk of colorectal cancer.4,5

Globally, IBD is estimated to affect 6.8 million individuals. In the USA and Europe, over three million people are estimated to have IBD, with prevalence exceeding 0.3% in North America, Oceania, and many European countries.6 Evidence indicates a changing epidemiology of IBD, with stable or decreasing incidence in North America and Europe, contrasted by rising incidence in newly industrialized countries. Initially considered a disease of Western Europe, its incidence has steadily increased globally,7 with rapid evolution in both developed and developing nations.8 This rise correlates with global industrialization and environmental changes.8,9 The increasing incidence in newly industrialized nations is associated with significant dietary changes, including exposure to processed foods, refined sugars, and dairy, alongside reduced consumption of plant-based fibers.10 Other environmental factors include smoking (particularly in CD), childhood antibiotic exposure, the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, stress, and the hygiene hypothesis.11

Most IBD epidemiology comes from high-income countries, with scarce data from lower socioeconomic regions.6 Africa has witnessed a rise in IBD cases, though the true burden remains unclear. Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa, lacks comprehensive data. Studies suggest a growing trend, but further research is essential to understand the magnitude and characteristics of IBD in Nigeria.12 Apart from a few hospital-based studies, there is a significant lack of comprehensive national data on IBD in the country.13–19 Thus, there is a pressing need for Nigerian data to facilitate a clearer understanding of the disease’s characteristics and burden, ultimately enabling improved healthcare policies.

The precise cause of IBD remains incompletely understood. However, evidence suggests the involvement of complex interactions among the host’s genetic predisposition, intestinal microbiota, various environmental factors, and the immune system. A large-scale genome-wide association study has identified more than 200 genetic loci associated with IBD, some of which overlap with those linked to other chronic autoimmune diseases. Most loci are shared across diverse ancestral groups, with some notable exceptions. European risk variants, such as nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain 2 (the first identified mutation that mediates the immune response to gut bacteria) and interleukin 23 receptors, are absent in East Asians.20

Conventional treatments for IBD primarily focus on symptom control through pharmacotherapy with aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, immunomodulators, and biologics. Additional general measures or surgical resection may also be employed.21 A review indicated that 5-aminosalicylic acid is more effective than a placebo.22 Another study found an excellent response to steroids; however, a one-year sustained response was poor.23 A long-term research on thiopurines in patients with UC reported a seven-year maintenance remission rate of 43.9% and a colectomy-free survival rate of 88%.24 Biologics have also shown promising efficacy; a combination of vedolizumab and ustekinumab yielded a clinical response rate of 83.9% and a remission rate of 47.0%.5

Significant diagnostic challenges persist in low- and middle-income countries, including pathological differentiation from intestinal tuberculosis, ignorance, and poorly trained pathologists.25 Furthermore, the cost of biologics presents a substantial barrier.25,26 The limited availability of newer therapeutic agents further restricts access to these effective treatments.27 Additionally, inadequate specialized care, insufficient endoscopic facilities, and a scarcity of trained gastroenterologists hinder optimal management.28 Economic constraints and limited health literacy often lead to poor adherence to treatment regimens.29

IBD was previously deemed rare in Africa.12 However, recent evidence has revealed a rising incidence in Nigeria; the likely factors include dietary habits and diagnostic capabilities.13,30 Despite this trend, there remains a paucity of data regarding the prevalence, clinical presentation, and management of IBD in Nigeria.12 Most studies are case reports or single-center experiences, making it challenging to generalize findings and implement effective healthcare policies.15,16

A multicenter study will provide a comprehensive and representative understanding of IBD in Nigeria.12 This research will help identify gaps in diagnosis and management, providing essential data for policymakers, healthcare providers, and stakeholders. The resulting data will be crucial for understanding the resources necessary to enhance IBD care, including early detection strategies, treatment accessibility, and specialized healthcare training.

This research aimed to assess the prevalence and clinical presentation of IBD in various parts of Nigeria and to explore the challenges in treating IBD in different healthcare settings. The results will help guide future research and shape policies for IBD care in Nigeria.

Materials and methods

Study design

The study was a cross-sectional survey conducted among clinicians performing gastrointestinal endoscopy across six zones of Nigeria from July 2019 to June 2024. It was a descriptive study that retrospectively examined the clinical records of patients with colonoscopic features of IBD. All clinicians performing gastrointestinal endoscopy in Nigeria’s six geopolitical regions were contacted to participate in the study. Thus, all Nigerian clinicians (endoscopists) who volunteered to participate were included.

Study locations

This is a multicenter study comprising 18 centers across the six geopolitical zones of Nigeria.

Study samples and diagnostic criteria

We included all patients with colonoscopy results indicating IBD, such as mucosal inflammation or ulceration. To distinguish IBD from intestinal tuberculosis, we used a systematic approach: analyzing tissue samples for caseating granulomas, staining for Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Ziehl-Neelsen), chest X-rays, and molecular tests like GeneXpert when available. This method helped reduce missed tuberculosis cases and confirm the accuracy of the suspected IBD diagnoses.

Definition of terms

  • Pan-colitis: Presence of inflammation beyond the splenic flexure;

  • Left-sided colitis: Presence of inflammation in the descending or sigmoid colon;

  • Anorectal disease: Presence of inflammation in the rectum and/or anal canal.

  • Montreal classification for CD31:

  • Location

    L1: Ileal;

    L2: Colonic;

    L3: Ileocolonic;

    L4: Isolated upper disease.

  • Behavior

    B1: Non-stricturing, non-penetrating;

    B2: Stricturing;

    B3: Penetrating;

    P: Perianal disease;

  • Montreal classification of the extent of UC31:

    E1: Ulcerative proctitis

    E2: Left-sided UC (distal UC)

    E3: Extensive UC (pancolitis)

Study protocol

The study utilized a structured Google Form designed in two phases, with all questions made compulsory to ensure complete data collection and minimize missing data. This mandatory format prevented participants from skipping questions, promoting thorough responses.

Phase 1: This 10-question phase collected center-level information, including the respondent’s specialty, center name, region of practice, total number of colonoscopies performed, number of suspected IBD cases, confirmed IBD cases, and the distribution of histological variants.

Phase 2: This 30-question phase focused on individual IBD cases, covering patient demographics, study center, endoscopist’s specialty, clinical presentation, lesion sites during endoscopy, histological findings, Montreal classification (location, extent, behavior), treatments administered, and challenges faced during management.

The questionnaire utilized drop-down menus and multiple-choice options to streamline responses, with open-ended questions for age and the name of the endoscopy center to allow precise data entry. The demographic subsection inquired about basic details such as age, gender, and practice region.

Data collection procedure

Data were gathered through an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire distributed via doctors’ forums and social media groups. Only interested endoscopists received detailed briefings about the study. Following pilot testing for clarity by the primary authors, the final forms were shared across various online platforms for comprehensive and uniform data collection.

Ethical considerations

Approval was obtained from the Federal Teaching Hospital, Katsina Health Research Ethical Review Committee (HREC), with approval numbers as follows: FTHKTNHREC.REG.24/06/22C/199; ADM/DSCST/HREC/APP/7102; NHREC/08/10-2015; UATH/HREC/PR/591.

Statistical analysis

Variables were entered into Excel, checked for completeness, and coded according to a developed guide. Analysis was performed using SPSS (version 27). Descriptive statistics summarized demographic and clinical characteristics: continuous variables were reported as means and standard deviations, while categorical variables were presented as frequencies and percentages. Missing data, assumed to be missing at random, were handled through multiple imputations; variables with over 20% missing data were excluded unless clinically relevant. Associations between categorical variables were assessed using Chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests, with a significance threshold of p < 0.05. For multivariate analysis, logistic regression models analyzed the relationships between histological variants, regions, and age groups, with covariates selected based on clinical relevance and bivariate findings. Multicollinearity was checked using variance inflation factors.

Results

Survey overview

This multicenter study involved 18 endoscopists, predominantly gastroenterologists (94.4%), representing all six geopolitical zones of Nigeria. Over five years (July 2019 to June 2024), a total of 4,715 colonoscopies were performed across the participating centers, with an average of 262 procedures per center.

IBD national prevalence

Among these cases, 459 were suspected of having IBD, accounting for a prevalence of 9.7% based on endoscopic diagnosis. Of the suspected cases, 208 (45.3%) were confirmed to have IBD, indicating a histological IBD prevalence of 4.4%. The confirmed cases consisted of 112 with UC (53.9%), 44 with CD (21%), and 52 with indeterminate colitis (25%).

Nigerian IBD regional prevalence

The regional prevalence of IBD identified through endoscopy across Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones was as follows: North-Central (6.8%), North-East (10.7%), North-West (14.9%), South-East (1.4%), South-South (11.9%), and South-West (13.9%).

Demographic characteristics of Nigerian IBD cases

A total of 158 individual IBD cases were documented, with an age range of four to 93 years and a mean age of 38.9 ± 16.7 years. There was a notable male preponderance, accounting for 87 cases (55.1%). Most cases originated from the South-Western region, with the highest number reported in 2024 (49 cases, 31%). Table 1 summarizes the socio-demographic characteristics of the IBD cases.

Table 1

Socio-demographic characteristics of inflammatory bowel disease cases

Socio-demographic characteristicsFrequencyPercentage
Age group (years)
  1–17138.2
  18–293421.5
  30–394125.9
  40–493019
  50–592012.7
  ≥692012.7
Regional location
  North-Central1710.8
  North-East117.0
  North-West4729.8
  South-East148.9
  South-West6943.7
Year of procedure
  20191710.8
  2020159.5
  20212113.3
  20222113.3
  20233522.2
  20244931

Clinical presentations of IBD cases

The most prevalent clinical presentation among the study subjects was rectal bleeding, reported in 97 cases (61.4%). Other clinical features are illustrated in Figure 1. Additional symptoms included fever, joint pain, fatigue, and mouth ulcers, classified as “other”. In terms of extraintestinal manifestations, musculoskeletal symptoms were the most frequently reported. Additional extraintestinal features are detailed in Table 2.

Clinical presentation of inflammatory bowel disease cases.
Fig. 1  Clinical presentation of inflammatory bowel disease cases.

PR, per rectal.

Table 2

EIM among the cases

EIMSpecific EIMFrequencyPercentage
Eye (n = 9)Uveitis666.7
Episcleritis333.3
Skin (n = 12)Aphthous ulcer541.7
Dermatitis herpetiform216.7
Alopecia216.7
Pyoderma gangrenosum18.3
Body rashes18.3
Hepatobiliary (n = 3)PSC266.7
AIH133.3
Musculoskeletal (n = 23)Arthritis2191.3
Ankylosing spondylitis14.4
Synovitis14.4
Others (n = 3)Polymyalgia rheumatica266.7
Sjogren’s syndrome133.3

Endoscopic findings of IBD cases

The most common endoscopic site of colonic inflammation was identified as pan-colitis, occurring in 98 cases (62%), followed by left colitis in 37 cases (23.4%). Anorectal involvement was noted in 16 cases (10.1%), while ileal involvement was observed in 14 cases (8.9%). Additional findings included hemorrhoids, strictures, fistulas, ulcers, and diverticula. Notably, approximately 13.3% (21 cases) also exhibited evidence of upper gastrointestinal involvement.

Histological confirmation

Among the 158 cases with suspected IBD identified during endoscopy, 141 cases (89.2%) had confirmed histological evidence of IBD, while the remaining 17 cases (10.8%) lacked available histological records. Furthermore, ulcers were reported in 60 cases (92.3%) of UC, while five cases (13.5%) of CD showed evidence of strictures, and eight cases (21.6%) had fistulas.

A statistically significant association was observed between endoscopic findings and regional location (p < 0.001). Regional differences were also evident across histological IBD variants and their classification by disease location and behavior (Tables 3 and 4). Multinomial logistic regression analysis (Table 5), with indeterminate colitis as the baseline, showed that weight loss strongly predicted CD (odds ratio (OR) = 5.77, p = 0.003), and the North-Central region showed increased odds for CD (OR = 11.13, p = 0.042). For UC, diarrhea and weight loss were significant predictors (ORs approximately 4–5, p < 0.01), and patients from the North-Central, North-West, and South-East regions had higher odds. Age was not a significant factor. These findings highlight the influence of regional and clinical factors on the histological diagnosis of IBD.

Table 3

Detailed characteristics of confirmed IBD cases

Characteristics of IBD casesSub-typesFrequencyPercentagep-value
Histological diagnosisUlcerative colitis6541.1***
Crohn’s disease3723.4
Indeterminate colitis3924.7
No record1710.8
Montreal classification of extent of ulcerative colitis (n = 65)Extensive colitis3553.9p < 0.001*
Left colitis2436.9
Proctitis23.1
Montreal disease location of Crohn’s diseaseColonic (L3)2567.6p < 0.001*
(n = 37)Ilio-colonic (L2)1232.4
Montreal disease behavior of Crohn’s diseaseInflammatory (B1)2670.3p < 0.001*
(n = 37)Stricturing (B2)513.5
Internal penetrating (B3)616.2
Table 4

Relationships between IBD histological variants and age groups/regional locations

Histological variants
p-value
Ulcerative colitisCrohn’s diseaseIndeterminate colitis
Regional location
  North-Central953p < 0.001*
  North-East740
  North-West23910
  South-East520
  South-West211726
Age group
  1–17643p = 0.507
  18–2911144
  30–3918811
  40–491366
  50–59836
  ≥601026
Table 5

Multinomial logistic regression predicting histological diagnosis

Disease categoryHistological diagnosisRegression coefficientStd. errorP valueOR95% CI
OR Lower Bound Upper Bound
Age−0.2780.1900.1420.7570.5221.098
Diarrhea−0.0290.5640.9590.9710.3222.932
Weight Loss1.7520.5990.0035.7681.78318.656
Crohn’s diseaseNorth-Central2.4101.1830.04211.1311.096113.022
North-East1.1291.2280.3583.0930.27834.354
North-West0.6610.6260.2911.9360.5686.602
South-East1.8321.3370.1706.2460.45585.756
South-WestRefRefRefRefRef
Age0.0550.1580.7261.0570.7751.441
Diarrhea1.3880.5350.0094.0071.40511.432
Weight Loss1.6050.5520.0044.9791.68914.678
Ulcerative colitisNorth-Central2.4371.1360.03211.4431.234106.123
North-East1.2121.1640.2983.3600.34332.866
North-West1.5410.5350.0044.6701.63713.324
South-East2.6791.2090.02714.5721.364155.722
South-WestRefRefRefRefRef

Acetylsalicylic acid derivatives were the most commonly used treatment agents, administered to 94 patients (60%). Only one patient (0.6%) underwent surgery. Antimicrobials and probiotics were among the other medications used in the management of IBD cases. Figure 2 illustrates the various treatment regimens employed for IBD management in Nigeria.

Treatment administered to individual inflammatory bowel disease cases.
Fig. 2  Treatment administered to individual inflammatory bowel disease cases.

Others: Methotrexate, Ursodeoxycholic acid, Hematinic, Proton pump inhibitors and antacids. ASA, 5-aminosalicylic acid.

Complications among IBD cases

The complications reported among IBD cases included fistulation (10 cases, 6.3%), severe bleeding (six cases, 3.8%), and intestinal obstruction (two cases, 1.3%).

Challenges encountered in IBD care

The most significant challenge in IBD management was the cost of evaluation and medications, affecting 78 patients (49.4%). Other challenges included the non-availability of drugs (73 cases, 46.2%), concerns about the reliability of histological diagnoses (37 cases, 23.4%), and a lack of response to available treatments (24 cases, 15.2%). Additionally, many IBD cases (58 patients, 36.7%) had incomplete or unavailable records regarding these complications and challenges.

Discussion

The Nigerian IBD Survey reveals that, although IBD (comprising CD and UC) was historically considered rare in Africa,12 recent evidence indicates a rising incidence in Nigeria. This trend is likely driven by environmental factors, dietary habits, and improved diagnostic capabilities.13,30 The multicenter survey provides valuable insights into the disease’s prevalence, clinical presentation, and management across Nigeria’s diverse geopolitical zones. Notably, IBD was identified in 4.4% of patients undergoing colonoscopy, highlighting its emerging significance within the Nigerian healthcare landscape.

However, reliance on voluntary clinician participation introduces inherent selection bias, particularly concerning underreporting from rural or under-resourced areas where endoscopic services are limited or absent. In Nigeria, advanced endoscopic facilities are primarily concentrated in urban centers, which have better infrastructure and trained personnel. As a result, the 18 centers, spanning all zones, reflect urban and semi-urban settings. This could lead to an overestimation of prevalence, as urban populations tend to have higher reported rates due to better access and awareness. In contrast, rural populations are underrepresented because of limited diagnostic capacity and healthcare-seeking behaviors influenced by geographic, socioeconomic, and cultural factors.

While expanding coverage across regions enhances regional diversity, the findings may not fully capture the national epidemiology, particularly the experiences of populations in rural areas. Future efforts should incorporate outreach to remote healthcare facilities and community-based surveys to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of IBD’s true burden across Nigeria, especially among underserved populations with limited access to specialized gastroenterological services.

The survey revealed a national IBD prevalence of 4.4% among patients undergoing colonoscopy, with UC (53.9%) being the most common, followed by CD (21%) and indeterminate colitis (25%) (Table 3). Regional variability was observed, with the North-West (14.9%) and South-West (13.9%) reporting higher prevalence than the South-East (1.4%). These findings should be interpreted cautiously due to potential sampling bias. The North-West contributed disproportionately more cases (47/158), likely benefiting from superior healthcare infrastructure, electronic medical records systems, and collaborative networks that enhance documentation and case reporting. Conversely, under-resourced regions such as the South-East probably underreport cases due to limited diagnostic capacity, infrastructural deficits, disparities in healthcare access, environmental exposures, diet, and infection rates. Similar regional patterns have been observed in Nigeria previously,13,32 although data from other sub-Saharan African countries remain limited, often restricted to case reports or single-center studies.33,34 Compared to Europe, where prevalence ranges from 150 to 200 per 100,000 (e.g., Germany, Sweden),35–38 Nigerian figures are significantly lower, reflecting differences in genetics, environment, and healthcare infrastructure. These disparities underscore the urgent need for comprehensive nationwide surveillance to better define IBD epidemiology in Nigeria.

In this survey, 62% of IBD patients presented with pancolitis, a figure consistent with other African cohorts, such as South Africa (50–70%),39 Egypt, and Morocco, where extensive disease is common, likely due to shared genetic and environmental factors.40 The high prevalence of pancolitis may result from delayed presentation, driven by limited healthcare access and awareness,27 as well as genetic predispositions and immune regulation.41 Environmental factors, including infections and diet, may also contribute.41 Overall, African populations tend to present with more extensive disease at diagnosis compared to Western countries, emphasizing the need for early detection, improved access to endoscopy, and public health initiatives aimed at reducing late-stage presentation and disease severity.30

In addition to geographical challenges, diagnostic limitations significantly impact epidemiological data. Only 45.3% of suspected cases received histological confirmation, raising concerns about diagnostic accuracy and potential misclassification. Resource constraints, including limited access to specialized gastrointestinal pathologists and variability in histopathological expertise across centers, hinder diagnosis. Furthermore, the absence of standardized validation protocols, such as multi-pathologist reviews, inter-rater agreement assessments, or adherence to European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation guidelines, compromises diagnostic consistency, especially for complex cases like indeterminate colitis, which constituted 25% of diagnoses. Implementing structured protocols, including double-blind reviews, consensus meetings, and standardized reporting templates, along with capacity-building and training, would enhance diagnostic reliability. Such improvements are crucial for effectively adapting international guidelines in resource-limited settings, ensuring more accurate epidemiological estimates and better-informed patient management strategies.

Demographically, the data reflect a notable male preponderance and a mean age of 38.9 years among individuals diagnosed with IBD (Table 1). This age distribution aligns with studies from other African nations, where IBD typically presents at a younger age compared to Europe and North America, where diagnoses often occur in later adulthood.33,40,42 For example, a study from South Africa reported a mean age of diagnosis at 36 years, with fewer cases of late-onset Crohn’s disease.43 In Europe and North America, the mean age of IBD diagnosis typically ranges from 30 to 40 years, though there is an increasing trend in diagnoses among individuals over 50 years.42,44 Notably, there has been a progressive rise in IBD cases from 2019 to 2024, particularly in the South-West region, with figures peaking in 2024. This trend indicates the need for targeted healthcare interventions and heightened awareness campaigns to address IBD in this demographic.

The most prevalent clinical symptom in the study was rectal bleeding, reported in over 61% of cases, alongside other symptoms such as fever, joint pain, and fatigue (Fig. 1). This constellation of symptoms aligns with known manifestations of IBD, which often leads to delays in diagnosis due to overlap with other gastrointestinal disorders. Moreover, the high incidence of extraintestinal manifestations, particularly musculoskeletal symptoms, emphasizes the need for a multidisciplinary approach to managing IBD, involving specialties such as gastroenterology, rheumatology, and ophthalmology (Table 2).

The prevalence of rectal bleeding and musculoskeletal symptoms as the modal primary and extraintestinal presentations is consistent with findings from previous studies across Africa and Europe, where gastrointestinal and musculoskeletal symptoms predominate.45,46 In contrast, European studies report a wider array of extraintestinal manifestations, such as arthritis and uveitis, occurring in 20–30% of cases. The stark contrast in the prevalence of these symptoms suggests differences in dietary habits and healthcare infrastructure, which may contribute to the more comprehensive management of IBD in developed countries.47–49

The treatment approaches for IBD in Nigeria predominantly rely on conservative management, with acetylsalicylic acid derivatives (around 60%) being the most prescribed medications. This contrasts sharply with practices in Europe and North America, where biologics and immunosuppressants are more commonly used, and surgical intervention rates can exceed 20% for CD.50,51 This reliance on aspirin-based therapies reflects systemic limitations, notably the absence of affordable, locally accessible 5-aminosalicylic acid agents and the high costs associated with biologics and advanced treatments.52 Consequently, many patients face barriers due to medication costs, and moderate-to-severe cases often go untreated with optimal therapies, leading to higher disease progression, complications, and decreased quality of life. These disparities underscore the urgent need for health policy interventions, such as subsidization programs and local procurement initiatives, alongside the development of context-specific treatment guidelines suited to Nigeria’s resource constraints.52

Furthermore, the remarkably low reported rate of surgical intervention (0.6%) raises questions about whether this figure accurately reflects management practices or results from systemic underutilization and underreporting. Factors such as referral patterns, conservative care, limited availability of specialized gastrointestinal surgeons, infrastructural deficiencies (e.g., lack of equipped operating theaters), and financial barriers may all contribute to this discrepancy. Additionally, inadequate documentation, especially in centers without electronic medical records, may further obscure true surgical rates. Without detailed data on referral pathways, surgical capacity, and healthcare infrastructure, the low intervention rate might be misinterpreted as optimal management or disease rarity. In reality, systemic limitations likely restrict access to and proper reporting of surgical care.52 Addressing these issues requires strengthening surgical infrastructure, improving multidisciplinary collaboration, and establishing clear referral networks to ensure surgical options are accessible and properly documented.

These interconnected challenges highlight crucial gaps in Nigeria’s IBD management system, emphasizing the need for policy reforms, infrastructural development, and capacity building to enhance care delivery and bring practices closer to international standards while considering local resource limitations.

The survey also reveals considerable challenges in managing IBD, particularly the high cost of evaluation and medications, which affected nearly half of the patients surveyed (49.4%). This financial burden is compounded by the lack of availability of necessary medications and concerns regarding the reliability of histological diagnoses (46.2% and 23.4%, respectively). Such barriers necessitate systemic changes to improve access to care, including the establishment of subsidized healthcare programs and improved pharmacological availability in local healthcare systems.53–55 The treatment barriers faced by patients are echoed in numerous studies across Sub-Saharan Africa. This economic burden is significantly lower in developed regions, where healthcare systems often provide support structures for managing chronic conditions.56

The study’s findings on IBD prevalence in Nigeria, showing a 4.4% national prevalence with UC as the most common subtype, provide valuable insights but are limited by several methodological and infrastructural challenges inherent in a multi-center, cross-sectional design. Variability in participating centers, including differences in diagnostic capacity, clinician expertise, and resource availability, may introduce selection bias and affect data consistency. The reliance on retrospective data and endoscopic findings, with only 45.3% of cases histologically confirmed, further constrains diagnostic accuracy and may lead to underestimation, especially in rural or resource-limited areas lacking specialized pathology services. Additionally, infrastructural limitations, such as the widespread absence of electronic medical records, hamper comprehensive and reliable data collection, contributing to a reported 36.7% rate of incomplete or missing data despite efforts like validation protocols and regular reviews. Most centers lack standardized digital documentation, which impedes data quality and consistency.

Moving forward, establishing centralized electronic health records and standardized diagnostic protocols, including strict histological validation aligned with guidelines such as European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation, is essential to enhance data accuracy, facilitate more representative epidemiological assessments, and improve management strategies for IBD across Nigeria. To address these disparities, the Nigerian healthcare system must develop strategies that effectively meet these needs, including promoting awareness about IBD among healthcare providers and patients, enhancing diagnostic capabilities, and improving treatment accessibility. A multi-faceted approach, including enhanced awareness, better diagnostics and treatment availability, and localized research efforts, is essential to understanding IBD’s complex epidemiology in Africa. Continued research and the establishment of specialized IBD clinics could further support these efforts, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes and quality of life for those affected by this chronic condition. By focusing on these multifaceted aspects, stakeholders can contribute to a more robust healthcare framework that adequately addresses IBD.

Conclusions

The findings of this multicenter survey illuminate the pressing issues surrounding IBD in Nigeria, drawing attention to its prevalence, complex clinical presentations, and significant management challenges. The data reveal critical similarities and differences compared to findings in West Africa, other regions of Africa, Europe, Asia, and the Americas. The lower prevalence in Nigeria and other African studies reflects unique genetic and environmental factors influencing IBD development. Demographic trends indicate a younger population affected by IBD in Nigeria, consistent with regional observations. However, disparities in clinical presentations, treatment modalities, and barriers to care highlight broader challenges within the Nigerian healthcare system that warrant urgent attention.

Declarations

Acknowledgement

We gratefully acknowledge the endoscopy and histopathology staff from the participating institutions for their assistance in data acquisition for this manuscript.

Ethical statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the Helsinki Declaration (as revised in 2024). Approval was obtained from the Federal Teaching Hospital, Katsina Health Research Ethical Review Committee (HREC), with the following approval numbers: FTHKTNHREC.REG.24/06/22C/199; ADM/DSCST/HREC/APP/7102; NHREC/08/10-2015; UATH/HREC/PR/591. The requirement for individual consent for this retrospective analysis was waived.

Data sharing statement

The dataset used in support of the findings of this study are included within the article.

Funding

There is no external source of funding.

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest to declare.

Authors’ contributions

YM contributed to manuscript concept, drafted, reviewed, edited the manuscript and served as guarantors; all authors contributed to data acquisition, drafting and editing the manuscript. They also read the manuscript and approved the final draft.

References

  1. Abraham C, Cho JH. Inflammatory bowel disease. N Engl J Med 2009;361(21):2066-2078 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  2. Cosnes J, Gower-Rousseau C, Seksik P, Cortot A. Epidemiology and natural history of inflammatory bowel diseases. Gastroenterology 2011;140(6):1785-1794 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  3. Nikolaus S, Schreiber S. Diagnostics of inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 2007;133(5):1670-1689 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  4. Torres J, Mehandru S, Colombel JF, Peyrin-Biroulet L. Crohn’s disease. Lancet 2017;389(10080):1741-1755 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  5. Ungaro R, Mehandru S, Allen PB, Peyrin-Biroulet L, Colombel JF. Ulcerative colitis. Lancet 2017;389(10080):1756-1770 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  6. GBD 2017 Inflammatory Bowel Disease Collaborators. The global, regional, and national burden of inflammatory bowel disease in 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020;5(1):17-30 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  7. Kaplan GG. The global burden of IBD: from 2015 to 2025. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015;12(12):720-727 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  8. de Souza HSP. Etiopathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease: today and tomorrow. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 2017;33(4):222-229 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  9. Windsor JW, Kaplan GG. Evolving Epidemiology of IBD. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 2019;21(8):40 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  10. Ananthakrishnan AN. Epidemiology and risk factors for IBD. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015;12(4):205-217 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  11. Ng SC, Shi HY, Hamidi N, Underwood FE, Tang W, Benchimol EI, et al. Worldwide incidence and prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease in the 21st century: a systematic review of population-based studies. Lancet 2017;390(10114):2769-2778 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  12. Hodges P, Kelly P. Inflammatory bowel disease in Africa: what is the current state of knowledge?. Int Health 2020;12(3):222-230 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  13. Musa Y, Abdulkadir YM, Manko M, Umar YS, Mohammed AN, Yusuf I, et al. A 10-year review of colonoscopy at aminu kano teaching hospital, Kano Nigeria. Niger J Clin Pract 2021;24(7):1072-1076 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  14. Obaseki DE, Forae GD. Clinicopathological features of in fl ammatory bowel disease in Benin City, Nigeria. Int J Adv Med Res 2014;1(1):16-19 View Article
  15. Abdulkareem LO, Abdul OA, Abdulkareem RA, Analikwu KG. Clinical Images and Medical Case Reports Ulcerative colitis in a young Nigerian male: A case report. J Clin Images Med Case Reports 2024;5(1):2823 View Article
  16. Ukwenya AY, Ahmed A, Odigie VI, Mohammed A. Inflammatory bowel disease in Nigerians: still a rare diagnosis?. Ann Afr Med 2011;10(2):175-179 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  17. Onyia CP, Asogwa P, Adiri W, Obienu O, Ijoma UN, Nwokediuko SC. Pyoderma Gangrenosum in a Young Nigerian Male with Severe Ulcerative Colitis: A Case Report. West Afr J Med 2023;40(11):1274-1279 PubMed/NCBI
  18. Ekwunife CN, Nweke IG, Achusi IB, Ekwunife CU. Ulcerative Colitis Prone to Delayed Diagnosis in a Nigerian Population: Case Series. Ann Med Health Sci Res 2015;5(4):311-313 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  19. Senbanjo IO, Oshikoya KA, Onyekwere CA, Abdulkareem FB, Njokanma OF. Ulcerative colitis in a Nigerian girl: a case report. BMC Res Notes 2012;5:564 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  20. Jostins L, Ripke S, Weersma RK, Duerr RH, McGovern DP, Hui KY, et al. Host-microbe interactions have shaped the genetic architecture of inflammatory bowel disease. Nature 2012;491(7422):119-124 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  21. Cai Z, Wang S, Li J. Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Comprehensive Review. Front Med (Lausanne) 2021;8:765474 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  22. Sutherland L, MacDonald JK. Oral 5-aminosalicylic acid for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003:CD000543 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  23. Li J, Wang F, Zhang HJ, Sheng JQ, Yan WF, Ma MX, et al. Corticosteroid therapy in ulcerative colitis: Clinical response and predictors. World J Gastroenterol 2015;21(10):3005-3015 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  24. Yamada S, Yoshino T, Matsuura M, Kimura M, Koshikawa Y, Minami N, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Long-Term Thiopurine Maintenance Treatment in Japanese Patients With Ulcerative Colitis. Intest Res 2015;13(3):250-258 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  25. Rajbhandari R, Blakemore S, Gupta N, Mannan S, Nikolli K, Yih A, et al. Crohn’s Disease Among the Poorest Billion: Burden of Crohn’s Disease in Low- and Lower-Middle-Income Countries. Dig Dis Sci 2023;68(4):1226-1236 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  26. Hu PJ. Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Asia: The Challenges and Opportunities. Intest Res 2015;13(3):188-190 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  27. Watermeyer G, Katsidzira L, Nsokolo B, Isaac Alatise O, Duduyemi BM, Kassianides C, et al. Challenges in the diagnosis and management of IBD: a sub-Saharan African perspective. Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2023;16:17562848231184986 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  28. Bhat P, Hassan C, Desalegn H, Aabakken L. Promotion of gastrointestinal endoscopy in Sub-Saharan Africa: What is needed, and how can ESGE and WEO help?. Endosc Int Open 2021;9(7):E1001-E1003 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  29. Chauke GD, Nakwafila O, Chibi B, Sartorius B, Mashamba-Thompson T. Factors influencing poor medication adherence amongst patients with chronic disease in low-and-middle-income countries: A systematic scoping review. Heliyon 2022;8(6):e09716 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  30. Hodges P, Adeniyi O, Devani S, Nwoko C, Owoseni O, Boateng KGA, et al. Emerging Patterns of Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Sub-Saharan Africa: 175 Cases From an Inflammatory Bowel Disease Network. J Crohns Colitis 2025;19(1):jjae126 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  31. Satsangi J, Silverberg MS, Vermeire S, Colombel JF. The Montreal classification of inflammatory bowel disease: controversies, consensus, and implications. Gut 2006;55(6):749-753 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  32. Manko M, Bello AK, Mohammed MF, Jabir AM, Isah IA, Daniyan M, et al. Colonoscopy in Zaria: Indications and findings. Niger J Clin Pract 2022;25(9):1580-1583 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  33. Watermeyer G, Epstein D, Adegoke O, Kassianides C, Ojo O, Setshedi M. Epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease in sub-Saharan Africa: A review of the current status. S Afr Med J 2020;110(10):1006-1009 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  34. Watermeyer G, Katsidzira L, Setshedi M, Devani S, Mudombi W, Kassianides C, et al. Inflammatory bowel disease in sub-Saharan Africa: epidemiology, risk factors, and challenges in diagnosis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022;7(10):952-961 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  35. Schneider W. [Epidemiology of chronic inflammatory intestinal diseases]. Z Gesamte Inn Med 1981;36(3):suppl 228-suppl 230 PubMed/NCBI
  36. Ng SC, Bernstein CN, Vatn MH, Lakatos PL, Loftus EV, Tysk C, et al. Geographical variability and environmental risk factors in inflammatory bowel disease. Gut 2013;62(4):630-649 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  37. King D, Reulen RC, Thomas T, Chandan JS, Thayakaran R, Subramanian A, et al. Changing patterns in the epidemiology and outcomes of inflammatory bowel disease in the United Kingdom: 2000-2018. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2020;51(10):922-934 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  38. Herauf M, Coward S, Pena-Sanchez JN, Bernstein C, Benchimol E, Bitton A, et al. Epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease among early-industrialized regions of the world: challenges in sustainable healthcare delivery. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2024;30(Suppl 1):S47 View Article
  39. Indiveri L, Berman R, Bhagowat M, Govender K, Meier W, Payne A, et al. A clinical audit of inflammatory bowel disease in a South African tertiary institution. South African Gastroenterol Rev 2011;8(3):6-18 View Article
  40. Shehab M, Azzam N, Al-Bawardy B, Abid S, Bashandi A, AlShihri R, et al. P1260 Demographics and Clinical Characteristics of Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the Middle East and North Africa: A Multi-Nation Cross-sectional (MIRAGE) Study. J Crohn’s Colitis 2025;19(Suppl 1):i2280-i2281 View Article
  41. El-Atrebi KA, Taher E, El Aguizy FH, Ali RM, Hegazy A, El-Sayed MM, et al. A descriptive study of inflammatory bowel disease at an Egyptian tertiary care center. Rev Gastroenterol Mex (Engl Ed) 2023;88(1):12-18 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  42. Weisshof R, Magen-Rimon R, Voss E, Swerdel J, Sheahan A, Hall N, et al. P1156 Characteristics and outcomes of over a million Inflammatory Bowel Disease patients in seven countries: a multinational cohort study. J Crohn’s Colitis 2024;18(Suppl 1):i2052 View Article
  43. Gounden C, Naidoo V, Moodley Y. Prevalence and predictors of severe Crohn’s disease at a tertiary hospital in South Africa. S Afr Med J 2024;114(4):40-45 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  44. Panayiotou S, Orfanoudaki E, Papatzelou I, Foteinogiannopoulou K, Theodoraki E, Drygiannakis I, et al. P0707 Impact of age of disease diagnosis on disease phenotype and severity in patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. J Crohn’s Colitis 2025;19(Suppl 1):i1379 View Article
  45. Mantzaris GJ. Editorial: symptoms predicting active intestinal inflammation in patients with IBD. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2023;57(1):165-166 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  46. Jamal M, Karreman M, de Bruijne F, Kuijper TM, Hazes JM, Lopes Barreto D, et al. Impact of musculoskeletal joint complaints on quality of life in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2024;14(11):e088350 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  47. Faggiani I, Fanizza J, D’Amico F, Allocca M, Zilli A, Parigi TL, et al. Extraintestinal Manifestations in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: From Pathophysiology to Treatment. Biomedicines 2024;12(8):1839 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  48. Khrom M, Long M, Dube S, Robbins L, Botwin GJ, Yang S, et al. Comprehensive Association Analyses of Extraintestinal Manifestations in Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Gastroenterology 2024;167(2):315-332 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  49. Momayez Sanat Z, Vahedi H, Malekzadeh R, Fanni Z. A systematic review and meta-analysis of extra-intestinal manifestation of inflammatory bowel disease in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMRO) countries. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 2024;86(5):2892-2899 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  50. Di Rienzo A, Marinelli L, Dimmito MP, Toto EC, Di Stefano A, Cacciatore I. Advancements in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Management: From Traditional Treatments to Monoclonal Antibodies and Future Drug Delivery Systems. Pharmaceutics 2024;16(9):1185 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  51. Kovacevic N, Beciragic D, Causevic M. Acetylsalicylic Acid (Aspirin): Past, Present, and Future. Sarajev Med J 2024;1(2):92-104 View Article
  52. Barnes EL. Editorial: Striving for Equitable Care in Ulcerative Colitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2025;61(4):716-717 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  53. Burisch J, Claytor J, Hernandez I, Hou JK, Kaplan GG. The Cost of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Care: How to Make it Sustainable. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025;23(3):386-395 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  54. Mozos Muñoz C, Lavín Expósito C, Bouhmidi Assa Kali A, Jurado Monroy RM, Pinilla Sánchez J, Bonillo Merino C. N21 Clinical Nurse Specialist in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (CNS-IBD). Care challenges and economic sustainability. A Scoping review. J Crohn’s Colitis 2025;19(Suppl 1):i2457 View Article
  55. Visser E, Oude Voshaar AM, van Linschoten R, Bodelier A, Fitzpatrick C, de Jonge V, et al. P1251 A Care Pathway for Inflammatory Bowel Disease can Reduce Healthcare Costs and is Cost-Effective. J Crohn’s Colitis 2025;19(Suppl 1):i2264-i2265 View Article
  56. Jordan AA, Bhat S, Ali T, Brunskill SR, Clusen NA, Maltz RM, et al. Healthcare Access for Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the United States: A Survey by the Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2024:izae237 View Article PubMed/NCBI

About this Article

Cite this article
Musa Y, Saleh HT, Onyia CP, Aminu AS, Okonkwo KC, Adeniyi OF, et al. Unmasking Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Nigeria: A Multicenter Cross-sectional Analysis of Clinico-pathological and Endoscopic Findings. J Transl Gastroenterol. Published online: Jul 9, 2025. doi: 10.14218/JTG.2025.00011.
Copy        Export to RIS        Export to EndNote
Article History
Received Revised Accepted Published
March 6, 2025 May 13, 2025 June 10, 2025 July 9, 2025
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.14218/JTG.2025.00011
  • Journal of Translational Gastroenterology
  • eISSN 2994-8754
Back to Top

Unmasking Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Nigeria: A Multicenter Cross-sectional Analysis of Clinico-pathological and Endoscopic Findings

Yusuf Musa, Habib Tijjani Saleh, Chinwe Philomena Onyia, Abubakar Sadiq Aminu, Kenechukwu Chukwuemeka Okonkwo, Oluwafunmilayo Funke Adeniyi, Abdulkareem Lukman Olaitan, Hafizu Abdullahi Zubairu, Nasiru Altine Dankiri, Muhammad Manko, Matthew Olumuyiwa Bojuwoye, Owoseni Opeyemi Olubukola, Emuobor Odeghe, Yusuf Shehu Umar, Ganiyat Kikelomo Oyeleke, Isa Mustapha, Chinenye Unoma Nwoko, Evaristus Sunday Chukwudike
  • Reset Zoom
  • Download TIFF