Search

Few prospective studies have assessed the safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in elective endoscopy. Our primary aim was to compare the risks of endoscopy-related gastrointestinal bleeding and thromboembolic events in patients on DOACs or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in this setting. Secondarily, we examined the impact of the timing of anticoagulant resumption on the risk of delayed bleeding in high-risk therapeutic procedures. We conducted a multicenter, prospective, observational study from January 2018 to March 2020 of 1602 patients on oral anticoagulants (1004 on VKAs and 598 on DOACs) undergoing 1874 elective endoscopic procedures. Our primary outcomes were 90-day thromboembolic events and 30-day endoscopy-related gastrointestinal bleeding. The inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity score method was used for baseline covariate adjustment. The 2 groups had similar risks of endoscopy-related gastrointestinal bleeding (VKAs vs DOACs, 6.2% vs 6.7%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% CI, 0.67–1.65) and thromboembolic events (VKAs vs DOACs, 1.3% vs 1.5%; adjusted OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.34–2.38). In high bleeding risk procedures (n = 747), delayed anticoagulant resumption (> 48 hours or 24–48 hours vs < 24 hours) did not reduce the risk of postprocedural bleeding (10.3%, 9%, and 5.8%, respectively; adjusted P =.43). Hot and cold snare polypectomy were the most frequent high-risk interventions (41.8% and 39.8%, respectively). In a prospective study of patients on DOACs or VKAs undergoing elective endoscopy, endoscopy-related bleeding and thromboembolic events showed similar risk. Our study suggests that early anticoagulant resumption is safe in most patients, but more data are needed for advanced high-risk therapeutic procedures. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is the standard procedure for the diagnosis of gastric cancer (GC), some GCs are missed. There are no published data on the missed rate of GC in Spain. To determine the frequency and characteristics of missed GCs and assess the quality of the EGD in a specific population with GC. Records of all patients diagnosed with gastric adenocarcinoma between 2012 and 2016 in a defined geographic area were reviewed. Missed GC was defined as a case with a prior negative EGD for cancer. Quality indicators from the prior EGDs were measured. From 212 cases of GC, 25 cases were excluded. Seventeen out of 187 patients had a prior EGD (9.1%). Twelve of those 17 missed GC had a prior EGD with some abnormal findings. In 6 of them, biopsies were taken. Survival was no different between patients with missed and non-missed GC. Quality indicators that failed to meet standards were recording time, image documentation, and a protocol of biopsies. Missed GC in an EGD in a defined population in Spain is not uncommon (9.1%). The endoscopist is an important factor in missed GC due to lack of adequate detection and sampling error. Compliance with performance of quality indicators could reduce missed GC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ustekinumab is approved for ulcerative colitis (UC)., Aims: To assess the durability of ustekinumab in patients with UC and its short-term effectiveness, durability and tolerability in clinical practice., Methods: Retrospective, multicentre study of patients who had received their first ustekinumab dose at least 16 weeks before inclusion. Patients were followed until treatment discontinuation or last visit. Only patients with active disease at the start of ustekinumab treatment were considered in the effectiveness analysis. Patients who stopped ustekinumab before their last visit were considered not to be in subsequent remission., Results: We included 620 patients; 155 (25%) discontinued ustekinumab during follow-up (median 12 months). Rate of discontinuation was 20% per patient-year of follow-up. Anaemia at baseline (hazard ratio, HR 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-2.1), steroids at baseline (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.06-2.08) and more severe clinical activity at baseline (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.09-2.06) were associated with higher risk of discontinuation. At the end of induction, 226 (40%) patients were in steroid-free clinical remission. Moderate-severe vs mild disease activity at baseline (odds ratio [OR] 0.3; 95% CI 0.2-0.5), male sex (OR 0.5; 95% CI 0.4-0.8), and increased number of previous biologics (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.6-0.8) were associated with lower likelihood of steroid-free clinical remission at week 16. One hundred and seventy-six patients (28%) had at least one adverse event. We observed no negative impact of ustekinumab on extraintestinal manifestations and/or immune-mediated diseases., Conclusions: Ustekinumab durability in UC was relatively high, and treatment was effective in highly refractory patients. The safety profile was consistent with previous studies., (© 2024 The Author(s). Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Helicobacter pylori (Hp) is the main trigger of chronic gastric atrophy and the main leading cause of gastric cancer. Hp infects the normal gastric mucosa and can lead to chronic inflammation, glandular atrophy, intestinal metaplasia, dysplasia and finally adenocarcinoma. Chronic inflammation and gastric atrophy associated with Hp infection appear initially in the distal part of the stomach (the antrum) before progressing to the proximal part (the corpus-fundus). In recent years, endoscopic developments have allowed for the characterization of various gastric conditions including the normal mucosa (pyloric/fundic gland pattern and regular arrangement of collecting venules), Hp-related gastritis (Kyoto classification), glandular atrophy (Kimura-Takemoto classification), intestinal metaplasia (Endoscopic Grading of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia), and dysplasia/adenocarcinoma (Vessel plus Surface classification). Despite being independent classifications, all these scales can be integrated into a single model: the endoscopic model for gastric carcinogenesis. This model would assist endoscopists in comprehending the process of gastric carcinogenesis and conducting a systematic examination during gastroscopy. Having this model in mind would enable endoscopists to promptly recognize the implications of Hp infection and the potential patient's risk of developing gastric cancer., (Copyright © 2024. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U.)

Background and Objectives: There are few scales with prospective validation for the assessment of the upper gastrointestinal mucosal cleanliness during an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). The aim of this study was to develop a valid and reproducible cleanliness scale for use during an EGD., Methods: We developed a cleanliness scale (Barcelona scale) with a score (0-2 points) of five segments of the upper gastrointestinal tract with thorough cleaning techniques (esophagus, fundus, body, antrum, and duodenum). First, 125 photos (25 of each area) were assessed, and a score was assigned to each image by consensus among 7 experts endoscopists. Subsequently, 100 of the 125 images were selected and the inter- and intra-observer variability of 15 previously trained endoscopists was evaluated using the same images at two different times., Results: In total, 1500 assessments were performed. In 1336/1500 observations (89%) there was agreement with the consensus score, with a mean kappa value of 0.83 (0.45-0.96). In the second evaluation, in 1330/1500 observations (89%) there was agreement with the consensus score, with a mean kappa value of 0.82 (0.45-0.93). The intra-observer variability was 0.89 (0.76-0.99)., Conclusions: The Barcelona cleanliness scale is a valid measure and reproducible with minimal training. Its application in clinical practice is a significant step to standardize the quality of the EGD., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Anti-TNF agents are the only effective biological agents for the prevention of postoperative recurrence (POR) in Crohn's disease (CD). However, they are contraindicated or have been shown to fail in some patients. Although ustekinumab and vedolizumab were licensed for CD some years ago, data in this setting are scarce., Methods: All CD patients in whom ustekinumab or vedolizumab was prescribed for the prevention of POR within three months of ileocolonic resection with anastomosis were identified from the ENEIDA registry. The development of endoscopic, clinical and surgical POR was registered., Results: Forty patients were treated for the prevention of POR with ustekinumab and 25 were treated with vedolizumab. Eighty per cent had at least one risk factor for POR (prior resections, active smoking, perianal disease or penetrating disease behaviour). All the patients had been exposed to anti-TNF therapy. After a median follow-up of 17 and 26 months, the cumulative probability of clinical POR at 12 months after surgery was 32% and 30% for ustekinumab and vedolizumab, respectively. Endoscopic assessment within the first 18 months after surgery was available for 80% of the patients on ustekinumab and 70% for those on vedolizumab. The rate of endoscopic POR was 42% for ustekinumab and 40% for vedolizumab. One patient treated with ustekinumab and two with vedolizumab underwent a new intestinal resection., Conclusions: Ustekinumab and vedolizumab seem to be effective in the prevention of POR in patients at high risk. Our results warrant controlled trials comparing these drugs with conventional therapies., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest MM has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Faes, Takeda, Tillots; PN has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, Abbvie, Janssen, Takeda, Roche, Sandoz, Ferring, Adacyte, Faes Farma, Kern Pharma, Pfizer, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Vifor Pharma, Chiesi and Tillots; MDM-A has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, AbbVie, Hospira, Pfizer, Takeda, Janssen, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Tillotts Pharma, FaesPharma; MB-W has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, Ferring, Abbvie, Janssen, Biogen and Takeda; MC has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, Abbvie, Takeda, Jannsen, Pfizer, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Chiesi, Ferring, Shire Pharmaceuticals and Dr. Falk Pharma; MS-A has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from Takeda, Janssen, MSD, Abbvie, Ferring, Chiesi, Tillots and Pfizer; MBA has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, AbbVie, Janssen, Kern Pharma, Celltrion, Takeda, Gillead, Celgene, Pfizer, Sandoz, Biogen, Fresenius, Ferring, Faes Farma, Dr. Falk Pharma, Chiesi, Gebro Pharma, Adacyte and Vifor Pharma; YZ has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, AbbVie, Janssen, Takeda, Kern Pharma, Biogen; JPG has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, Kern Pharma, Biogen, Mylan, Takeda, Janssen, Roche, Sandoz, Celgene, Gilead, Ferring, Faes Farma, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Falk Pharma, Tillotts Pharma, Chiesi, Casen Fleet, Gebro Pharma, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, and Vifor Pharma; JG has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from Roche, MSD, Abbvie, Kern Pharma, Takeda, Janssen, Pfizer, Ferring, Chiesi and GE Healthcare; DB has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from Abbvie, Janssen, Ferring, Pfizer, and Takeda; DC-D has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, Ferring, Abbvie, Janssen, Faes Farma, Pfizer, Tillots and Takeda; SM has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, Ferring, Abbvie, Janssen, Pfizer and Takeda; LM has served as a speaker and advisory member for or has received research funding from MSD, Takeda, Janssen, Abbvie and Pfizer; FC has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from Takeda, Janssen, MSD, and Ferring; MC has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from Takeda, Janssen, Faes Farma, and MSD; ED has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory member for or has received research funding from AbbVie, Adacyte Therapeutics, Celltrion, Gilead, Janssen, Kern Pharma, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Takeda, Tillots, Ferring, and Thermofisher; the remaining authors have no potential conflicts to declare., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background and Aims: The development programm UNIFI has shown promising results of ustekinumab in ulcerative colitis [UC] treatment which should be confirmed in clinical practice. We aimed to evaluate the durability, effectiveness, and safety of ustekinumab in UC in real life., Methods: Patients included in the prospectively maintained ENEIDA registry, who received at least one intravenous dose of ustekinumab due to active UC [Partial Mayo Score [PMS]>2], were included. Clinical activity and effectiveness were defined based on PMS. Short-term response was assessed at Week 16., Results: A total of 95 patients were included. At Week 16, 53% of patients had response [including 35% of patients in remission]. In the multivariate analysis, elevated serum C-reactive protein was the only variable significantly associated with lower likelihood of achieving remission. Remission was achieved in 39% and 33% of patients at Weeks 24 and 52, respectively; 36% of patients discontinued the treatment with ustekinumab during a median follow-up of 31 weeks. The probability of maintaining ustekinumab treatment was 87% at Week 16, 63% at Week 56, and 59% at Week 72; primary failure was the main reason for ustekinumab discontinuation. No variable was associated with risk of discontinuation. Three patients reported adverse events; one of them had a fatal severe SARS-CoV-2 infection., Conclusions: Ustekinumab is effective in both the short and the long term in real life, even in a highly refractory cohort. Higher inflammatory burden at baseline correlated with lower probability of achieving remission. Safety was consistent with the known profile of ustekinumab., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Gastric cancer (GC) incidence is currently decreasing; however, survival is still low. Early GC (EGC) has better prognosis and it could be cured by endoscopic methods., Patients and Methods: Observational study of a retrospective cohort of all patients with GC during a five-year period in a health area of Spain. EGC diagnosis was defined as mucosal or submucosal (T1) cancers regardless of lymph node involvement, whereas the advanced GC were T2-T4., Results: 209 patients were included, and 26 (12%) of them were EGC. There was no difference between EGC and advanced GC in age, sex, HP infection, precancerous lesions or histological type. Other characteristics of EGC were different from advanced GC: location (antrum and incisura in 76% vs 38%, p=0.01), alarm symptoms (69% vs 90%, p<0.01), curative treatment (100% vs 30%, p<0.01), performance status (PS 0-1: 92% vs 75%, p=0.03) and survival (85% vs 20%, p<0.001). Among patients who received curative treatment, 98% (79/81) underwent surgery and 2% (2/81) were treated by mucosectomy. Seven (27%) patients with EGC could have benefited from treatment by endoscopic submucosal resection., Discussion: EGC frequency was low (12% of GCs) in our health area. EGC had a high percentage of alarm symptoms, and was located in the distal third of the stomach (antrum and incisura) and had better prognosis compared to advanced GC. Strategies to increase detection and endoscopic treatment of EGC should be implemented., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)