6 research outputs found

    Limited relevance and progression of histological alterations in the liver during thioguanine therapy in inflammatory bowel disease patients

    No full text
    Background: Thioguanine is associated with liver toxicity, especially nodular regenerative hyperplasia (NRH). We assessed if liver histology alters during long-term maintenance treatment with thioguanine in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods: Liver specimens of thioguanine treated IBD patients with at least two liver biopsies were revised by two independent liver pathologists, blinded to clinical characteristics. Alterations in histopathological findings between first and sequential liver specimen were evaluated and associated clinical data, including laboratory parameters and abdominal imaging reports, were collected. Results: Twenty-five IBD patients underwent sequential liver biopsies prior to, at time of, or after cessation of thioguanine treatment. The median time between the first and second biopsy was 25 months (range: 14–54). Except for one normal liver specimen, any degree of irregularities including inflammation, steatosis, fibrosis and some vascular disturbances were observed in the biopsies. The rates of perisinusoidal fibrosis (91%), sinusoidal dilatation (68%) and nodularity (18%) were the same in the first and second liver biopsies. A trend towards statistical significance was observed for phlebosclerosis (36% of the first vs. 68% of the second biopsies, p =.092). Presence of histopathological liver abnormalities was not associated with clinical outcomes. Furthermore, two patients in this cohort had portal hypertension in presence of phlebosclerosis. In another two patients, nodularity of the liver resolved upon thioguanine withdrawal. Conclusion: Vascular abnormalities of the liver were commonly observed in thioguanine treated IBD patients, although these were not progressive and remained of limited clinical relevance over time

    High detection rate of adenomas in familial colorectal cancer

    No full text
    Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND AND AIMS: Subjects with one first-degree relative (FDR) with colorectal cancer (CRC) 1) adenomas. Men were more often found to have an adenoma than women (24% vs 14.3%; p=0.01). Adenomas were more frequent in group B compared with group A (22.0% vs 15.6%; p=0.09). CONCLUSION: The yield of colonoscopic surveillance in familial CRC is substantially higher than the yield of screening reported for the general population

    Adorno, der sport und die kritische sporttheorie

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE: Colonoscopic surveillance is recommended for individuals with familial colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the appropriate screening interval has not yet been determined. The aim of this randomized trial was to compare a 3-year with a 6-year screening interval. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individuals between ages 45 and 65 years with one first-degree relative with CRC age < 50 years or two first-degree relatives with CRC were selected. Patients with zero to two adenomas at baseline were randomly assigned to one of two groups: group A (colonoscopy at 6 years) or group B (colonoscopy at 3 and 6 years). The primary outcome measure was advanced adenomatous polyps (AAPs). Risk factors studied included sex, age, type of family history, and baseline endoscopic findings. RESULTS: A total of 528 patients were randomly assigned (group A, n = 262; group B, n = 266). Intention-to-treat analysis showed no significant difference in the proportion of patients with AAPs at the first follow-up examination at 6 years in group A (6.9%) versus 3 years in group B (3.5%). Also, the proportion of patients with AAPs at the final follow-up examination at 6 years in group A (6.9%) versus 6 years in group B (3.4%) was not significantly different. Only AAPs at baseline was a significant predictor for the presence of AAPs at first follow-up. After correction for the difference in AAPs at baseline, differences between the groups in the rate of AAPs at first follow-up and at the final examination were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: In view of the relatively low rate of AAPs at 6 years and the absence of CRC in group A, we consider a 6-year surveillance interval appropriate. A surveillance interval of 3 years might be considered in patients with AAPs and patients with >/= three adenomas
    corecore