Oestrogens promote tumorigenesis in a mouse model for colitis-associated cancer

Cellular mechanisms in basic and clinical gastroenterology and hepatolog

Fecal microbiota transplantation as novel therapy in gastroenterology: A systematic review

AIM: To study the clinical efficacy and safety of Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT). We systematically reviewed FMT used as clinical therapy. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Conference proceedings from inception to July, 2013. Treatment effect of FMT was calculated as the percentage of patients who achieved clinical improvement per patient category, on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: We included 45 studies; 34 on Clostridium difficile-infection (CDI), 7 on inflammatory bowel disease, 1 on metabolic syndrome, 1 on constipation, 1 on pouchitis and 1 on irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). In CDI 90% resolution of diarrhea in 33 case series (n = 867) was reported, and 94% resolution of diarrhea after repeated FMT in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) (n = 16). In ulcerative colitis (UC) remission rates of 0% to 68% were found (n = 106). In Crohn's disease (CD) (n = 6), no benefit was observed. In IBS, 70% improvement of symptoms was found (n = 13). 100% Reversal of symptoms was observed in constipation (n = 3). In pouchitis, none of the patients (n = 8) achieved remission. One RCT showed significant improvement of insulin sensitivity in metabolic syndrome (n = 10). Serious adverse events were rare. CONCLUSION: FMT is highly effective in CDI, and holds promise in UC. As for CD, chronic constipation, pouchitis and IBS data are too limited to draw conclusions. FMT increases insulin sensitivity in metabolic syndrom

Low interobserver agreement among endoscopists in differentiating dysplastic from non-dysplastic lesions during inflammatory bowel disease colitis surveillance

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVES: During endoscopic surveillance in patients with longstanding colitis, a variety of lesions can be encountered. Differentiation between dysplastic and non-dysplastic lesions can be challenging. The accuracy of visual endoscopic differentiation and interobserver agreement (IOA) has never been objectified. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We assessed the accuracy of expert and nonexpert endoscopists in differentiating (low-grade) dysplastic from non-dysplastic lesions and the IOA among and between them. An online questionnaire was constructed containing 30 cases including a short medical history and an endoscopic image of a lesion found during surveillance employing chromoendoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 17 endoscopists, 8 experts, and 9 nonexperts assessed all 30 cases. The overall sensitivity and specificity for correctly identifying dysplasia were 73.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 62.1-85.4) and 53.8% (95% CI 42.6-64.7), respectively. Experts showed a sensitivity of 76.0% (95% CI 63.3-88.6) versus 71.8% (95% CI 58.5-85.1, p = 0.434) for nonexperts, the specificity 61.0% (95% CI 49.3-72.7) versus 47.1% (95% CI 34.6-59.5, p = 0.008). The overall IOA in differentiating between dysplastic and non-dysplastic lesions was fair 0.24 (95% CI 0.21-0.27); for experts 0.28 (95% CI 0.21-0.35) and for nonexperts 0.22 (95% CI 0.17-0.28). The overall IOA for differentiating between subtypes was fair 0.21 (95% CI 0.20-0.22); for experts 0.19 (95% CI 0.16-0.22) and nonexpert 0.23 (95% CI 0.20-0.26). CONCLUSION: In this image-based study, both expert and nonexpert endoscopists cannot reliably differentiate between dysplastic and non-dysplastic lesions. This emphasizes that all lesions encountered during colitis surveillance with a slight suspicion of containing dysplasia should be removed and sent for pathological assessment