Are Biologics Safe in the Immediate Postoperative Period? A Single-Center Evaluation of Consecutive Crohn's Surgical Patients.

There is no study to date examining the safety of initiating or restarting biologic therapy after major abdominal surgery for Crohn's disease. The purpose of this study was to determine differences in the rates of 90-day superficial surgical site infections, intra-abdominal sepsis, and overall postoperative infectious complications among patients who were initiated on or restarted a biologic within 90 days postoperatively compared with those who were not. This was a retrospective cohort study. The study was conducted at an IBD referral center. Adult patients with Crohn's disease who received a biologic therapy within 90 days of a major abdominal operation between May 20, 2014, and December 31, 2018, were included. Ninety-day superficial surgical site infection, intra-abdominal sepsis, and overall postoperative infectious complications were measured. A total of 680 patients with Crohn's disease were included: 351 were initiated on biologic therapy within 90 days after surgery and 329 were not. Patients exposed to biologic therapy postoperatively were younger (p < 0.001), had a lower BMI (p = 0.0014), were less often diabetic (p = 0.0011), and were more often exposed preoperatively to biologics (p < 0.0001) and immunomodulators (p < 0.0001) but not corticosteroids (p = 0.8399). Of those exposed postoperatively, nearly all (93.7%) had been on a biologics preoperatively, and most resumed the same biologic (68.0%). The median time to starting biologic therapy postoperatively was 31 days (range, 7-89 d). Postoperative biologic exposure was not associated with an increased risk of superficial surgical site infection (HR = 1.02 (95% CI, 0.95-1.09) per week; p = 0.59), intra-abdominal sepsis (HR = 1.07 (95% CI, 0.99-1.16); p = 0.73), or overall postoperative infectious complications (HR = 1.02 (95% CI, 0.98-1.07); p = 0.338); the overall rates of each at 90 days was 13%, 8%, and 28%. The study was limited by its retrospective design and single-center data. Postoperative initiation or resumption of biologic therapy did not increase 90-day rates of superficial surgical site infection, intra-abdominal sepsis, or total infectious complications after major abdominal surgery for Crohn's disease. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B207. ¿SON SEGUROS LOS FÁRMACOS BIOLÓGICOS EN EL POSTOPERATORIO INMEDIATO? UNA EVALUACIÓN DE UN SOLO CENTRO DE PACIENTES QUIRÚRGICOS CONSECUTIVOS CON ENFERMEDAD DE CROHN: No hay ningún estudio hasta la fecha que examine la seguridad de iniciar o reiniciar la terapia biológica después de una cirugía abdominal mayor en enfermedad de Crohn.Determinar las diferencias en las tasas a 90 días de infecciones del sitio quirúrgico superficial, sepsis intraabdominal y complicaciones infecciosas postoperatorias generales entre los pacientes en que se inició o reinició un biológico dentro de los 90 días después de la operación en comparación con aquellos que no lo recibieron.Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.Centro de referencia de enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.Pacientes adultos con enfermedad de Crohn que recibieron una terapia biológica dentro de los 90 días de una operación abdominal mayor entre el 20 de mayo de 2014 y el 31 de diciembre de 2018.Infección superficial del sitio quirúrgico, sepsis intraabdominal y complicaciones infecciosas postoperatorias generales a 90 días.Se incluyeron un total de 680 pacientes con enfermedad de Crohn: 351 se iniciaron en terapia biológica dentro de los 90 días posteriores a la cirugía y 329 no. Los pacientes expuestos a terapia biológica después de la operación eran más jóvenes (p <0.001), tenían un índice de masa corporal más bajo (p = 0.0014), eran con menos frecuencia diabéticos (p = 0.0011) y estaban expuestos con mayor frecuencia preoperatoriamente a fármacos biológicos (p <0.0001) e inmunomoduladores (p <0.0001) pero no a corticosteroides (p = 0.8399). De los expuestos postoperatoriamente, casi todos (93.7%) habían estado en terapia biológica en el preoperatorio, y la mayoría reanudó la misma terapia biológica (68%). La mediana de tiempo para comenzar la terapia biológica después de la operación fue de 31 días (rango, 7-89 días). La exposición biológica postoperatoria no se asoció con un mayor riesgo de infección superficial del sitio quirúrgico (HR 1.02 (0.95-1.09) por semana, p = 0.59), sepsis intraabdominal. (HR: 1.07 (0.99-1.16), p = 0.73), o complicaciones infecciosas postoperatorias generales (HR: 1.02, intervalo de confianza del 95% 0.98-1.07, p = 0.338); las tasas generales de cada uno a los 90 días fue del 13%, 8% y 28%.Diseño retrospectivo, y datos de un centro único.El inicio o la reanudación en el postoperatorio de la terapia biológica no aumentaron las tasas a 90 días de infección superficial de sitio quirúrgico, sepsis intraabdominal o complicaciones infecciosas totales después de una cirugía abdominal mayor por enfermedad de Crohn. Consulte el Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B207. (Traducción-Dr Jorge Silva Velazco)

An aggravated trajectory of depression and anxiety co-morbid with hepatitis C: : A 21 to 62 month follow-up study in 61 South Australian outpatients

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to explore the course of depression and anxiety in chronic hepatitis C patients. METHODS:   Data were combined from two studies: (1) Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores in 395 consecutive Australian outpatients from 2006 to 2010 formed the baseline measurement; and (2) Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) scores in a survey of a sub-sample of these patients in 2011 formed the follow-up measurement. After converting DASS to HADS scores, changes in symptom scores and rates of case-ness (≥8), and predictors of follow-up symptoms were assessed. RESULTS:   Follow-up data were available for 61 patients (70.5% male) whose age ranged from 24.5 to 74.6 years (M=45.6). The time to follow-up ranged from 20.7 to 61.9 months (M=43.8). Baseline rates of depression (32.8%) and anxiety (44.3%) increased to 62.3% and 67.2%, respectively. These findings were confirmed, independent of the conversion, by comparing baseline HADS and follow-up DASS scores with British community norms. Baseline anxiety and younger age predicted depression, while baseline anxiety, high school non-completion, and single relationship status predicted anxiety. CONCLUSION:  This study demonstrated a worsening trajectory of depression and anxiety. Further controlled and prospective research in a larger sample is required to confirm these findings

Management of Patients With Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis During the Coronavirus Disease-2019 Pandemic: Results of an International Meeting

The International Organization for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IOIBD) is the only global organization devoted to the study of and management of the inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), namely, Crohn?s disease and ulcerative colitis. Membership is composed of physician-scientists who have established expertise in these diseases. The organization hosts an annual meeting and a number of working groups addressing issues of the epidemiology of IBD, diet and nutrition, and the development and use of treatments for IBD. There are currently 89 members of IOIBD representing 26 different countries. The organization has taken particular interest in the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and how it may affect the IBD patient population. This document summarizes the results of 2 recent virtual meetings of the group and subsequent expert guidance for patients and providers

Global burden of 288 causes of death and life expectancy decomposition in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations, 1990–2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021

Background: Regular, detailed reporting on population health by underlying cause of death is fundamental for public health decision making. Cause-specific estimates of mortality and the subsequent effects on life expectancy worldwide are valuable metrics to gauge progress in reducing mortality rates. These estimates are particularly important following large-scale mortality spikes, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. When systematically analysed, mortality rates and life expectancy allow comparisons of the consequences of causes of death globally and over time, providing a nuanced understanding of the effect of these causes on global populations. Methods: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021 cause-of-death analysis estimated mortality and years of life lost (YLLs) from 288 causes of death by age-sex-location-year in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations for each year from 1990 until 2021. The analysis used 56 604 data sources, including data from vital registration and verbal autopsy as well as surveys, censuses, surveillance systems, and cancer registries, among others. As with previous GBD rounds, cause-specific death rates for most causes were estimated using the Cause of Death Ensemble model—a modelling tool developed for GBD to assess the out-of-sample predictive validity of different statistical models and covariate permutations and combine those results to produce cause-specific mortality estimates—with alternative strategies adapted to model causes with insufficient data, substantial changes in reporting over the study period, or unusual epidemiology. YLLs were computed as the product of the number of deaths for each cause-age-sex-location-year and the standard life expectancy at each age. As part of the modelling process, uncertainty intervals (UIs) were generated using the 2·5th and 97·5th percentiles from a 1000-draw distribution for each metric. We decomposed life expectancy by cause of death, location, and year to show cause-specific effects on life expectancy from 1990 to 2021. We also used the coefficient of variation and the fraction of population affected by 90% of deaths to highlight concentrations of mortality. Findings are reported in counts and age-standardised rates. Methodological improvements for cause-of-death estimates in GBD 2021 include the expansion of under-5-years age group to include four new age groups, enhanced methods to account for stochastic variation of sparse data, and the inclusion of COVID-19 and other pandemic-related mortality—which includes excess mortality associated with the pandemic, excluding COVID-19, lower respiratory infections, measles, malaria, and pertussis. For this analysis, 199 new country-years of vital registration cause-of-death data, 5 country-years of surveillance data, 21 country-years of verbal autopsy data, and 94 country-years of other data types were added to those used in previous GBD rounds. Findings: The leading causes of age-standardised deaths globally were the same in 2019 as they were in 1990; in descending order, these were, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lower respiratory infections. In 2021, however, COVID-19 replaced stroke as the second-leading age-standardised cause of death, with 94·0 deaths (95% UI 89·2–100·0) per 100 000 population. The COVID-19 pandemic shifted the rankings of the leading five causes, lowering stroke to the third-leading and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to the fourth-leading position. In 2021, the highest age-standardised death rates from COVID-19 occurred in sub-Saharan Africa (271·0 deaths [250·1–290·7] per 100 000 population) and Latin America and the Caribbean (195·4 deaths [182·1–211·4] per 100 000 population). The lowest age-standardised death rates from COVID-19 were in the high-income super-region (48·1 deaths [47·4–48·8] per 100 000 population) and southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania (23·2 deaths [16·3–37·2] per 100 000 population). Globally, life expectancy steadily improved between 1990 and 2019 for 18 of the 22 investigated causes. Decomposition of global and regional life expectancy showed the positive effect that reductions in deaths from enteric infections, lower respiratory infections, stroke, and neonatal deaths, among others have contributed to improved survival over the study period. However, a net reduction of 1·6 years occurred in global life expectancy between 2019 and 2021, primarily due to increased death rates from COVID-19 and other pandemic-related mortality. Life expectancy was highly variable between super-regions over the study period, with southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania gaining 8·3 years (6·7–9·9) overall, while having the smallest reduction in life expectancy due to COVID-19 (0·4 years). The largest reduction in life expectancy due to COVID-19 occurred in Latin America and the Caribbean (3·6 years). Additionally, 53 of the 288 causes of death were highly concentrated in locations with less than 50% of the global population as of 2021, and these causes of death became progressively more concentrated since 1990, when only 44 causes showed this pattern. The concentration phenomenon is discussed heuristically with respect to enteric and lower respiratory infections, malaria, HIV/AIDS, neonatal disorders, tuberculosis, and measles. Interpretation: Long-standing gains in life expectancy and reductions in many of the leading causes of death have been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, the adverse effects of which were spread unevenly among populations. Despite the pandemic, there has been continued progress in combatting several notable causes of death, leading to improved global life expectancy over the study period. Each of the seven GBD super-regions showed an overall improvement from 1990 and 2021, obscuring the negative effect in the years of the pandemic. Additionally, our findings regarding regional variation in causes of death driving increases in life expectancy hold clear policy utility. Analyses of shifting mortality trends reveal that several causes, once widespread globally, are now increasingly concentrated geographically. These changes in mortality concentration, alongside further investigation of changing risks, interventions, and relevant policy, present an important opportunity to deepen our understanding of mortality-reduction strategies. Examining patterns in mortality concentration might reveal areas where successful public health interventions have been implemented. Translating these successes to locations where certain causes of death remain entrenched can inform policies that work to improve life expectancy for people everywhere. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation