Search

Background: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have a higher risk of infection and are frequently not up to date with their immunizations. Objectives: This study aims to review vaccination status and evaluate whether age, disease type, or treatment regimen could predict the absence of seroprotection against selected vaccine-preventable infection in adults with IBD. Methods: Cross-sectional study using questionnaire, immunization records review, and assessment of tetanus-specific, varicella-specific, and measles-specific immunoglobulin G concentrations. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01908283. Results: Among the 306 adults assessed (median age 42.7 years old, 70% with Crohn's disease, 78% receiving immunosuppressive treatment), only 33% had an immunization record available. Absence of seroprotection against tetanus (6%) was associated with increasing age and absence of booster dose; absence of seroprotection against varicella (1%) or measles (3%) was exclusively observed in younger patients with Crohn's disease. There was no statistically significant difference in immunoglobulin concentrations among treatment groups. Although vaccinations are strongly recommended in IBD patients, the frequencies of participants with at least 1 dose of vaccine recorded were low for nearly all antigens: tetanus 94%, diphtheria 87%, pertussis 54%, poliovirus 22%, measles-mumps-rubella 47%, varicella-zoster 0%, Streptococcus pneumoniae 5%, Neisseria meningitidis 12%, hepatitis A 41%, hepatitis B 48%, human papillomavirus 5%, and tick-borne encephalitis 6%. Conclusions: Although many guidelines recommend the vaccination of IBD patients, disease prevention through immunization is still often overlooked, including in Switzerland, increasing their risk of vaccine-preventable diseases. Serological testing should be standardized to monitor patients' protection during follow-up as immunity may wane faster in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: The structured IBD Ahead 'Optimised Monitoring' programme was designed to obtain the opinion, insight and advice of gastroenterologists on optimising the monitoring of Crohn's disease activity in four settings: (1) assessment at diagnosis, (2) monitoring in symptomatic patients, (3) monitoring in asymptomatic patients, and (4) the postoperative follow-up. For each of these settings, four monitoring methods were discussed: (a) symptom assessment, (b) endoscopy, (c) laboratory markers, and (d) imaging. Based on literature search and expert opinion compiled during an international consensus meeting, recommendations were given to answer the question 'which diagnostic method, when, and how often'. The International IBD Ahead Expert Panel advised to tailor this guidance to the healthcare system and the special prerequisites of each country. The IBD Ahead Swiss National Steering Committee proposes best-practice recommendations adapted for Switzerland. Methods: The IBD Ahead Steering Committee identified key questions and provided the Swiss Expert Panel with a structured literature research. The expert panel agreed on a set of statements. During an international expert meeting the consolidated outcome of the national meetings was merged into final statements agreed by the participating International and National Steering Committee members - the IBD Ahead 'Optimized Monitoring' Consensus. Results: A systematic assessment of symptoms, endoscopy findings, and laboratory markers with special emphasis on faecal calprotectin is deemed necessary even in symptom-free patients. The choice of recommended imaging methods is adapted to the specific situation in Switzerland and highlights the importance of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging besides endoscopy. Conclusion: The recommendations stress the importance of monitoring disease activity on a regular basis and by objective parameters, such as faecal calprotectin and endoscopy with detailed documentation of findings. Physicians should not rely on symptoms only and adapt the monitoring schedule and choice of options to individual situations. © 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Medical therapy of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is becoming more complex, given the increasing choice of drugs to treat Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to summarize the current guidelines for first-line treatments in IBD. Methods: An extensive literature search with focus on the guidelines of the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation for the diagnosis and treatment of CD and UC was performed. First-line treatments were defined as the following drug categories: 5-aminosalicylates, budesonide, systemic steroids, azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, methotrexate, infliximab, adalimumab and certolizumab pegol. The following drug categories were not included: cyclosporine and tacrolimus (not yet approved by Swissmedic for IBD treatment). Results: Treatment recommendations for the following clinically frequent situations are presented according to disease severity: ileocecal CD, colonic CD, proximal small bowel CD and perianal CD. For UC the following situations are presented: ulcerative proctitis, left-sided colitis and pancolitis. Conclusions: We provide a summary on the use of first-line therapies for clinically frequent situations in patients with CD and UC. Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Probiotics are live microbial organisms that are present in foods or dietary supplements and that confer health benefits to the host when ingested in sufficient quantities. Probiotics can be bacterial (e.g. Bifidobacteria spp. and Lactobacillus spp.) or yeasts (e.g. Saccharomyces boulardii). The administration of probiotics is often believed to be by and large beneficial for individuals with inflammatory or infectious diseases of the gastrointestinal tract. These positive effects are generally attributed to the ability of probiotics to regulate intestinal permeability, normalize host intestinal flora, improve gut immune barrier function, and equilibrate the balance between proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines. Of note, however, these claims are not always substantiated by findings from properly conducted clinical trials. Of particular importance, even when results from randomized controlled trials support the beneficial effects of a particular probiotic for a specific indication, the benefits achieved by the probiotic are generally not translatable to other probiotic formulations. This review discusses the gastrointestinal indications for probiotic use and describes the level of evidence that supports the use of specific probiotics for these indications. Several indications are addressed, including enteric infections, gastritis caused by Helicobacter pylori infection, necrotizing enterocolitis, inflammatory bowel diseases, and irritable bowel syndrome. Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]