Search

Background/objectives: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are complex, multifactorial chronic inflammatory disorders affecting the gastrointestinal tract. Their epidemiology, particularly for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), is increasing worldwide, with a rise in the co-diagnosis of IBD and EGIDs. Both disorders share common risk factors, such as early exposure to antibiotics or specific dietary habits. Moreover, from a molecular perspective, eosinophilic infiltration is crucial in the diagnosis of eosinophilic disorders, and it also plays a pivotal role in IBD histological diagnosis. Indeed, recent evidence highlights the significant role of eosinophils in the health of the intestinal mucosal barrier and as mediators between innate and acquired immunity, even indicating a potential role in IBD pathogenesis. This narrative review aims to summarize the current evidence regarding the common clinical and molecular aspects of EGIDs and IBD and the current state of knowledge regarding overlap conditions and their pathogenesis., Methods: Pubmed was searched until May 2023 to assess relevant studies describing the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and therapy of EGIDs in IBD., Results: The immune pathways and mechanisms underlying both EGIDs and IBD remain partially known. An improved understanding of the role of eosinophils in overlapping conditions could lead to enhanced diagnostic precision, the development of more effective future therapeutic strategies, and a more accurate prediction of patient response. Consequently, the identification of red flags indicative of an eosinophilic disorder in IBD patients is of paramount importance and must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

The gastrointestinal tract is home to trillions of diverse microorganisms collectively known as the gut microbiota, which play a pivotal role in breaking down undigested foods, such as dietary fibers. Through the fermentation of these food components, short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) such as acetate, propionate, and butyrate are produced, offering numerous health benefits to the host. The production and absorption of these SCFAs occur through various mechanisms within the human intestine, contingent upon the types of dietary fibers reaching the gut and the specific microorganisms engaged in fermentation. Medical literature extensively documents the supplementation of SCFAs, particularly butyrate, in the treatment of gastrointestinal, metabolic, cardiovascular, and gut-brain-related disorders. This review seeks to provide an overview of the dynamics involved in the production and absorption of acetate, propionate, and butyrate within the human gut. Additionally, it will focus on the pivotal roles these SCFAs play in promoting gastrointestinal and metabolic health, as well as their current therapeutic implications.

(1) Background : Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is frequently associated to other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). This study aims at assessing physicians' awareness of the issue and the current status of IMID management. (2) Methods : A web-based survey was distributed to all 567 physicians affiliated to IG-IBD. (3) Results : A total of 249 (43.9%) physicians completed the survey. Over 90% of the responding physicians were gastroenterology specialists, primarily working in public hospitals. About 51.0% of the physicians had access to an integrated outpatient clinic, where gastroenterologists collaborated with rheumatologists and 28.5% with dermatologists. However, for 36.5% of physicians, integrated ambulatory care was not feasible. Designated appointment slots for rheumatologists and dermatologists were accessible to 72.2% and 58.2% of physicians, respectively, while 20.1% had no access to designated slots. About 5.2% of physicians report investigating signs or symptoms of IMIDs only during the initial patient assessment. However, 87.9% inquired about the presence of concomitant IMIDs at the initial assessment and actively investigated any signs or symptoms during subsequent clinical examination. (4) Conclusions : While Italian physicians recognize the importance of IMIDs associated with IBD, organizational challenges impede the attainment of optimal multidisciplinary collaboration. Efforts should be directed toward enhancing practical frameworks to improve the overall management of these complex conditions.

Background: Ustekinumab (UST) has demonstrated effectiveness in treating patients with Crohn's disease. Monitoring treatment response can improve disease management and reduce healthcare costs. We investigated whether UST trough levels (TLs), serum IL22, and Oncostatin M (OSM) levels could be early indicators of non-response by analysing their correlation with clinical and biochemical outcomes in CD. Methods: Patients with CD initiating UST treatment from October 2018 to September 2020 were enrolled at six Italian centres for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Clinical and biochemical data were collected at four time points: baseline, second subcutaneous (SC) dose, fourth SC dose, and 52 weeks. TLs were measured during maintenance, at the second SC dose, and at the fourth SC dose. IL-22 and OSM serum levels were assessed at baseline and the second SC dose. We analysed whether TLs, IL22 levels, and OSM serum levels were associated with clinical response, clinical remission, biochemical remission, and endoscopic remission using the appropriate statistical tests. Results: Out of eighty-four initially enrolled patients, five were lost to follow-up, and eleven discontinued the drug before 52 weeks. At the 52-week time point, 47% achieved biochemical remission based on faecal calprotectin levels, and 61.8% achieved clinical remission. TLs at the second SC dose significantly correlated with biochemical remission at the same time point ( p = 0.011). However, TLs did not correlate with clinical remission. Baseline OSM levels did not correlate with biochemical or clinical remission or response. IL22 levels notably decreased during UST therapy ( p = 0.000), but its values did not correlate with biochemical or clinical remission. Conclusions: UST is an effective therapy for patients with CD. TLs measured at the second SC dose significantly correlated with biochemical remission, emphasising their potential role in treatment monitoring. Levels of OSM and IL-22, despite a significant decrease in the latter during therapy, did not exhibit correlations with clinical or biochemical outcomes in our study. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Pathological obesity is a growing public health concern, and its association with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) poses challenges in selecting the appropriate bariatric procedure. Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has become a popular choice due to its simplicity and effectiveness in weight loss. However, concerns regarding postoperative GERD have been raised. This study aimed to evaluate the association between preoperative assessment of esophageal function and the risk of developing postoperative GERD in patients undergoing SG. A comprehensive evaluation was conducted, including symptom assessment, upper endoscopy, high-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM), and 24 h esophageal pH impedance monitoring (MII-pH). A total of 500 obese patients were included, and their data were compared with 25 healthy volunteers. This study revealed that patients without GERD symptoms, normal endoscopy, HRM, and MII-pH were suitable candidates for SG, with low risk of developing postoperative GERD. The addition of fundoplication techniques to SG may be considered in patients with mild reflux or those at risk of developing it. This study emphasizes the importance of preoperative evaluation in selecting the appropriate bariatric procedure to minimize the risk of postoperative GERD and expand the indications for SG in obese patients.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a clinical condition with a prevalence of up to 25% in Western countries. Typical GERD symptoms include heartburn and retrosternal regurgitation. Lifestyle modifications, including diet, are considered a first-line therapeutic approach. To evaluate the impact of life habits on GERD in this cross-sectional study, we used data collected through an online survey from 1146 participants. GERD was defined according to the Montreal Consensus. For all participants, clinical and lifestyle characteristics were recorded. Overall, 723 participants (63.1%) consumed a diet including animal food (non-vegans), and 423 participants (36.9%) were vegans. The prevalence of GERD was 11% (CI 95%, 9-14%) in non-vegans and 6% (CI 95%, 4-8%) in vegans. In the multivariate analysis, after adjusting for confounding factors, subjects on a non-vegan diet were associated with a two-fold increase in the prevalence of GERD compared to vegans (OR = 1.96, CI 95%, 1.22-3.17, p = 0.006). BMI and smoking habits were also significantly associated with GERD. This study shows that an animal food-based diet (meat, fish, poultry, dairy, and eggs) is associated with an increased risk of GERD compared to a vegan diet. These findings might inform the lifestyle management of patients with GERD-related symptoms.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic esophageal disease that needs lifelong management and follow-up. The diagnosis requires an upper endoscopy with at least one esophageal biopsy demonstrating >15 eosinophils/high-power field, and often occurs with a diagnostic delay of up to ten years, partly due to the absence of valid non-invasive screening tools. In addition, serial upper endoscopies with esophageal biopsies are mandatory to assess the efficacy of any ongoing treatment in patients with EoE. These procedures are invasive, costly, and, when performed without sedation, are often poorly tolerated by patients. Therefore, there is the clinical need to identify reliable non-invasive or minimally invasive biomarkers that could be used to assess disease activity in clinical practice as a surrogate of peak eosinophil counts on esophageal biopsies. This review summarizes evidence on investigational non-invasive or minimally invasive biomarkers for the diagnosis and follow-up of EoE to report on the state of the art in the field and support future research. We discussed eosinophil-derived mediators including eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN, also known as eosinophil protein X), eosinophil peroxidase (EPO), and major basic protein (MBP) as well as other promising non-eosinophil-derived biomarkers. Although several studies have shown the utility of most biomarkers collected from the serum, esophageal luminal secretions, and feces of EoE patients, numerous limitations currently hamper the integration of such biomarkers in clinical practice. Future studies should aim at validating the utility of non-invasive and minimally invasive biomarkers using rigorous protocols and updated consensus criteria for EoE.

Background: The effectiveness of anti-TNF or ustekinumab (UST) as a second-line biologic after vedolizumab (VDZ) failure has not yet been described., Aims and Methods: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, We aim to investigate the effectiveness of anti-TNF and UST as second-line therapy in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) who failed VDZ as a first-line treatment. The primary outcome was clinical response at week 16-22. Secondary outcomes included the rates of clinical remission, steroid-free clinical remission, CRP normalization, and adverse events., Results: Fifty-nine patients who failed on VDZ as a first-line treatment for CD were included; 52.8% patients received anti-TNF and 47.2% UST as a second-line therapy. In initial period (Week 16-22), the clinical response and remission rate was similar between both groups: 61.2% vs. 68%, p = 0.8 and 48.3% vs. 56%, p = 0.8 on anti-TNF and UST therapy, respectively. Furthermore, in the maintenance period the rate was similar: 75% vs. 82.3%, p = 0.8 and 62.5% vs. 70.5%, p = 0.8, respectively. Of the patients, 12 out of the 59 stopped the therapy, without a significant difference between the two groups ( p = 0.6)., Conclusion: Second-line biological therapy after VDZ failure therapy was effective in >60% of the patients with CD. No differences in effectiveness were detected between the use of anti-TNF and UST as a second line.

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, immunomodulatory therapies and hospital admission were suspected to increase the risk of infection. Nevertheless, patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) treated with intravenous (i.v.) biologics had to move to hospitals for drug infusion. We investigated the impact of hospitalisation in patients with IBD. We conducted a survey including consecutive IBD patients initially in clinical and biochemical remission treated with biologics at the end of the first lockdown period. Patients underwent the normally scheduled clinical visits, performed at hospital for i.v.-treated patients or at home for patients treated with s.c. drugs. We administered to all patients the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire and other 12 questions, specifically related to COVID-19 and its implications. A total of 189 IBD patients were recruited, 112 (59.3%) treated with i.v. drugs and 77 (40.7%) with s.c. ones. No relapses were recorded in either group (hospitalized vs. non-hospitalized, p = ns), as well as which, COVID-19 infections were not demonstrated in patients in contact with people with suspected symptoms or directly experiencing them. The total HADS score obtained by the sum of all items was also almost identical between groups (37.1 ± 2.8 vs. 37.2 ± 2.8; p = 0.98). In patients treated with i.v. drugs receiving a televisit ( n = 17), the rate of satisfaction with telemedicine (58.8%) was significantly lower compared with those treated with s.c. drugs (94.8%; p < 0.0005). Our results suggest that hospitalisation during the COVID-19 outbreak does not increase the risk of COVID-19 infection as well as the risk of IBD relapse; moreover, the similar levels of anxiety in both groups could confirm that there is no need to convert patients from i.v. to s.c. therapy.

Background: Multiple studies have described the effectiveness of ustekinumab (UST) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) failing anti- Tumor necrosis factors (TNFs); however, the effectiveness of VDZ or UST as a third-class biologic has not yet been described., Aims and Methods: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of VDZ and UST as a third-class biologic in patients with CD., Results: Two-hundred and four patients were included; 156/204 (76%) patients received VDZ as a second- and UST as a third-class therapy (group A); the remaining 48/204 (24%) patients received UST as a second- and VDZ as a third-class therapy (group B). At week 16-22, 87/156 (55.5%) patients and 27/48 (56.2%) in groups A and B, respectively, responded to treatment ( p = 0.9); 41/156 (26.2%) and 15/48 (31.2%) were in clinical remission ( p = 0.5). At week 52; 89/103 (86%) patients and 25/29 (86.2%) of the patients with available data had responded to third-class treatment in groups A and B, respectively ( p = 0.9); 31/103 (30%) and 47/29 (24.1%) were in clinical remission ( p = 0.5)., Conclusion: Third-class biological therapy was effective in more than half of the patients with CD. No differences in effectiveness were detected between the use of VDZ and UST as a third-class agent.

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are chronic gastrointestinal conditions requiring corticosteroid and immunosuppressive therapy for disease control. Patients with EGIDs usually report impaired quality of life. We aimed to report the clinical and psychological impact of COVID-19 infection in EGID patients. In this prospective web-based study we invited all consecutive EGID patients attending the University Hospital of Salerno (Campania) and Padua (Veneto) to fill an ad hoc COVID-19 survey. Moreover, a telemedicine service for direct consultation was organized. Data regarding the occurrence and perception of COVID-19 infection as well as clinical information were recorded. The study population included 102 EGID patients (mean age 36.6 years, 34 females), of whom 89 had eosinophilic esophagitis, nine had gastroenteritis, and four had colitis. No patient was diagnosed with COVID-19 or had recurrence of his/her primary disease. All of them were adherent to therapy and preventive measures adoption. Most patients were worried because of COVID-19 and social preventing measures but did not consider themselves at major risk or susceptible to COVID-19 or other infections due to their chronic condition or therapy. Female gender and low education level were associated to a higher psychological perception of COVID-19 compared to lockdown status or other demographic and clinical factors ( p < 0.05). Overall, COVID-19 had a limited clinical impact on patients with EGIDs. The degree of education and sex, but not the fact of living in a lockdown area, influenced the perception of SARS-CoV-2 infection.