Search

Introduction: Vaccination hesitancy is an important barrier to vaccination among IBD patients. The development of adverse events is the main concern reported. The purpose of this monocentric study was to assess SARS-CoV-2 vaccination safety in IBD patients by evaluating the postvaccination flare risk and incidence of overall adverse events. Methods: Surveys were handed out on three consecutive months to each patient presenting at the Crohn-Colitis Centre, where they documented their vaccination status and any side effects experienced after vaccination. Dates of flares occurring in 2021 were recorded from their electronic medical records. Baseline and IBD characteristics and flare incidence were compared between the vaccinated and unvaccinated patients, and among the vaccinated population before and after their vaccination doses. The characteristics of patients who developed side effects and of those who did not were compared. Results: We enrolled 396 IBD patients, of whom 91% were vaccinated. The proportion of patients who experienced flares was statistically not different between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated population (1.8 vs 2.6 flares per 100 person-months (p=0.28)). Among vaccinated patients, there was no difference across the prevaccination, 1month post any vaccination, and more than 1month after any vaccination periods, and between the Spikevax and Cominarty subgroups. Overall, 46% of patients reported vaccination side effects, mostly mild flu-like symptoms. Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination with mRNA vaccines seems safe, with mostly mild side effects. The IBD flare risk is not increased in the month following any vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Ulcerative colitis is characterized by a chronic intestinal inflammation limited to the mucosa of the colon, of variable proximal extent. Main symptoms are diarrhea, possibly bloody, and abdominal pain. It evolves with phases of relapse and remission. The diagnosis of ulcerative colitis is made based on clinical, endoscopic, and histologic findings. Currently, the various drug treatment options act by, among other things, reducing the activity of the immune system locally or systemically. In mild to moderate forms, 5-ASA remains the mainstay of both induction and maintenance treatment. In more severe flares, cortisone is the treatment of choice. To limit the prolonged/repeated intake of corticosteroids, there are several options of biologics with distinct ranges of action and safety profiles for inducing and/or maintaining remission. Therapeutic goals are evolving and go beyond achieving clinical remission. Endoscopic and histological remission are new targets to further improve quality of life and limit long-term complications, such as colorectal cancer., Competing Interests: Laura Rossier hat keine Interessenkonflikte. Christoph Matter hat Beraterhonorare, Vortragshonorare oder Kongress-Support von AbbVie, Dr Falk, Janssen, Pfizer, Sandoz, Takeda, Vifor erhalten., (© 2023 Aerzteverlag medinfo AG.)

This article reviews the clinical implications and limitations of the number needed to treat (NNT). Clinicians can quickly use this rather intuitive statistical value to assess the expected effectiveness of a treatment and explain it to patients. However, careful attention must be paid to the outcomes used in defining an NNT, as well as, the rate of the specific event in the population and the duration of observation. Conflicts of interest may also affect this easily manipulated statistical tool. Some often prescribed treatments have an NNT well above 20, implying an uncertain benefit for the patient, which emphasizes the need to carefully weigh the risk-benefit balance (NNT vs. NNH: number needed to harm) when prescribing. This review shows particularly low NNTs for anti-infectious agents compared to other drugs frequently used in medical practice., Competing Interests: Les auteurs n’ont déclaré aucun conflit d’intérêts en relation avec cet article.