Search

Introduction: Complicated perianal disease (cPD) may be the sole presentation of Crohn's disease (CD). The role of small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) in the diagnostic algorithm of cPD is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the role of SBCE as a diagnostic tool, in patients with cPD, after a negative standard workup for CD. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective, cross-sectional study, in patients with cPD, and negative standard workup for CD (ileocolonoscopy and cross-sectional imaging), who underwent SBCE for suspected CD. Demographics, biomarkers, and the Lewis Score (LS) were recorded and analyzed. An LS ≥ 135 was considered a positive SBCE for diagnosing CD. Results: Ninety-one patients were included: 65 (71.4%) males; median age: 37 (29–51) years; cPD duration: 25.1 (12.5–66.1) months. Positive SBCE: 24/91 (26.4%) patients. Fecal calprotectin (FC) positively correlated with LS (r = 0.81; p < 0.001). FC levels of 100 µg/g and 50 µg/g had a sensitivity of only 40% and 55% to rule out small-bowel CD, with a negative predictive value (NPV) of only 76% and 80%, respectively. Conclusions: SBCE contributed to CD diagnosis in a quarter of patients with cPD after a negative standard workup. FC levels correlated with the degree of inflammation defined by the LS. However, the NPV of FC was low, suggesting that SBCE should be considered for patients with cPD even after a negative standard workup. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Drug sustainability (DS) is a surrogate marker for treatment efficacy. We aimed to compare the DS of two main biologics used to treat moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC), infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ), in a real-world setting. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary medical center in Israel. We included patients treated between 1 December 2017 and 1 May 2021, who were followed for up to 300 weeks. DS was defined as corticosteroid-, surgical-, and hospitalization-free treatment. Results: 217 patients with UC were included. VDZ had a significantly longer median DS of 265.6 weeks compared to IFX's 106.5 weeks (p = 0.001) in treatment-naïve patients, even when adjusting for disease severity (HR 0.55 95 CI 0.3–0.98, p = 0.042). In treatment-experienced patients, DS was comparable between IFX and VDZ (p = 0.593). Conclusions: VDZ showed significantly longer DS in treatment-naïve patients with UC compared to IFX, also when adjusted for disease severity. There was no difference in DS between VDZ and IFX in treatment-experienced patients and patients switching from one drug to another. VDZ may be a suitable first-line treatment for biologic-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe UC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vaccines are pivotal for control of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) treated with antitumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α have lower serologic response after two COVID-19 vaccine doses. Data regarding a third vaccine dose are scarce. An Israeli multicenter prospective observational study recruited 319 subjects: 220 with IBD (79 treated with anti-TNFα) and 99 healthy control (HC) participants. All patients received two mRNA-BNT162b2 vaccines (Pfizer/BioNTech), 80% of whom received a third vaccine dose. Evaluation included disease activity, anti-spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N) antibody levels, anti-TNFα drug levels, and adverse events (AEs). All participants showed significant serologic response one month after receiving a third dose. However, three months later, the anti-S levels decreased significantly in patients treated with anti-TNFα compared with the non-anti-TNFα and HC groups. A correlation between serologic response to the third vaccine dose and anti-TNF drug levels was not found. No significant AE or IBD exacerbation was observed. Importantly, lower serologic response after the third vaccine dose predicted infection. A third dose of BNT162b2 is effective and safe in patients with IBD. Lower serologic response predicted infection, even in seropositive subjects. Lower serologic responses and their rapid decline suggest a fourth vaccine dose in this patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) can have an impact on pregnancy outcomes due to the effect of the disease activity and medication use. This study aimed to evaluate the pregnancy outcomes in IBD patients treated at a multidisciplinary clinic. Methods: This study was a retrospective cohort study including consecutive pregnant patients with IBD having a singleton gestation attending a multidisciplinary clinic between 2012 and 2019. The IBD activity and management throughout gestation were assessed. The pregnancy outcomes included: adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes, mode of delivery, and three integrative outcomes: (1) a favorable pregnancy outcome, (2) a poor pregnancy outcome, and (3) an unfavorable maternal outcome. The IBD pregnant cohort was compared with a cohort of non-IBD pregnant women delivering at the same shift. Multivariable logistic regression was used for risk assessment. Results: Pregnant women with IBD (141) and without (1119) were included. Mean maternal age was 32 [±4] years. Patients with IBD had a higher rate of nulliparity (70/141 (50%) vs. 340/1119 (30%), p < 0.001) and lower BMI (21.42 kg/m2 (19.18–23.44) vs. 22.48 (20.31–25.59), p = 0.002). All the other characteristics were comparable. Most patients with IBD 124/141 (88%) were in clinical remission at conception; with maintenance therapy in 117/141 patients (83%). A third of the patients, 43/141 (30.5%), were treated with biologics. Exacerbation occurred during pregnancy in 51/141 (36%). The majority of the maternal and neonatal outcomes and all the composite outcomes were comparable between the patients with IBD and the women without IBD. Cesarean delivery was more frequent in patients with IBD (49/141 (34.8%) vs. 270/1119 (24.1%), p = 0.021). IBD was not associated with composite outcomes. Conclusions: In pregnant patients with IBD followed at a multidisciplinary clinic, the pregnancy outcomes were encouraging and comparable to those of the women without IBD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: With the development of narrow-band imaging (NBI) in the endoscopic evaluation of patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE), the role of random biopsies according to the Seattle protocol (SP) has been questioned. We aim to compare the utility of advanced imaging to SP in patients with BE. Methods: A prospective cohort of patients with proven BE was retrospectively analyzed. All biopsies were reviewed by an expert GI pathologist. Advanced imaging was tandemly used with SP in each endoscopic procedure. Results: A total of 155 out of 340 patients (45.5%) with BE were diagnosed with dysplasia during a median follow-up of 4.7 years (IQR 3.4–6.1 years) and were part of the statistical analysis. A total of 82 patients had a diagnosis of dysplasia at presentation, whereas 84 patients developed dysplasia during follow up. A total of 67 out of 82 patients with dysplasia at presentation (81.7%), and 65 out of 84 patients that were diagnosed with dysplasia during follow-up (77.4%) were diagnosed using SP. In addition, whereas all the events of EAC were diagnosed using targeted biopsies, 57.1% of the events of HGD and 86.3% of LGD were diagnosed using SP. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate the significance of SP in the detection of low- and high-grade dysplasia in patients with BE. SP should remain the mainstay of endoscopic surveillance in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Regulatory agencies supported vaccination of pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines, including patients with IBD. No data exist regarding these vaccines in IBD during pregnancy. Aim: To assess the serologic response to two doses of the mRNA SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 vaccine in pregnant women with IBD vaccinated during pregnancy, compared to that of pregnant women without IBD, and non-pregnant women with IBD. Methods: Anti-spike antibody levels were assessed in all women and in cord blood of consenting women. Results: From December 2020 to December 2021, 139 women were assessed: pregnant with IBD—36, pregnant without IBD—61, and not pregnant with IBD—42. Antibodies were assessed in cords of two and nine newborns of women with and without IBD, respectively. Mean gestational ages at administration of the second vaccine doses were 22.0 weeks in IBD and 23.2 weeks in non-IBD, respectively. Mean (SD) duration from the second vaccine dose to serology analysis in pregnant women with IBD, without IBD, and in non-pregnant women with IBD was 10.6 (4.9), 16.4 (6.3), and 4.3 (1.0) weeks, respectively. All women mounted a serologic response. In multivariable analysis, no correlation was found between the specific group and antibody levels. In both pregnancy groups, an inverse correlation between antibody levels and the interval from the second vaccine dose was demonstrated. Cord blood antibody levels exceeded maternal levels in women with and without IBD. Conclusion: All patients with IBD mounted a serologic response. The interval between vaccine administration to serology assessment was the most important factor determining antibody levels. A third vaccine dose should be considered in pregnant women with IBD vaccinated at early stages of pregnancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treated with anti-tumor-necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) exhibited lower serologic responses one-month following the second dose of the COVID-19 BNT162b2 vaccine compared to those not treated with anti-TNFα (non-anti-TNFα) or to healthy controls (HCs). We comprehensively analyzed long-term humoral responses, including anti-spike (S) antibodies, serum inhibition, neutralization, cross-reactivity and circulating B cell six months post BNT162b2, in patients with IBD stratified by therapy compared to HCs. Subjects enrolled in a prospective, controlled, multi-center Israeli study received two BNT162b2 doses. Anti-S levels, functional activity, specific B cells, antigen cross-reactivity, anti-nucleocapsid levels, adverse events and IBD disease score were detected longitudinally. In total, 240 subjects, 151 with IBD (94 not treated with anti-TNFα and 57 treated with anti-TNFα) and 89 HCs participated. Six months after vaccination, patients with IBD treated with anti-TNFα had significantly impaired BNT162b2 responses, specifically, more seronegativity, decreased specific circulating B cells and cross-reactivity compared to patients untreated with anti-TNFα. Importantly, all seronegative subjects were patients with IBD; of those, >90% were treated with anti-TNFα. Finally, IBD activity was unaffected by BNT162b2. Altogether these data support the earlier booster dose administration in these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) affecting millions of people worldwide. IBD therapies, designed for continuous immune suppression, often render patients more susceptible to infections. The effect of the immune suppression on the risk of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is not fully determined yet. Objective: To describe COVID-19 characteristics and outcomes and to evaluate the association between IBD phenotypes, infection outcomes and immunomodulatory therapies. Methods: In this multi-center study, we prospectively followed IBD patients with proven COVID-19. De-identified data from medical charts were collected including age, gender, IBD type, IBD clinical activity, IBD treatments, comorbidities, symptoms and outcomes of COVID-19. A multivariable regression model was used to examine the effect of immunosuppressant drugs on the risk of infection by COVID-19 and the outcomes. Results: Of 144 IBD patients, 104 (72%) were CD and 40 (28%) were UC. Mean age was 32.2 ± 12.6 years. No mortalities were reported. In total, 94 patients (65.3%) received biologic therapy. Of them, 51 (54%) at escalated doses, 10 (11%) in combination with immunomodulators and 9 (10%) with concomitant corticosteroids. Disease location, behavior and activity did not correlate with the severity of COVID-19. Biologics as monotherapy or with immunomodulators or corticosteroids were not associated with more severe infection. On the contrary, patients receiving biologics had significantly milder infection course (p = 0.001) and were less likely to be hospitalized (p = 0.001). Treatment was postponed in 34.7% of patients until recovery from COVID-19, without consequent exacerbation. Conclusion: We did not witness aggravated COVID-19 outcomes in patients with IBD. Patients treated with biologics had a favorable outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]