Health outcomes of 1000 children born to mothers with inflammatory bowel disease in their first 5 years of life

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the long-term health outcomes of children born to mothers with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and to assess the impact of maternal IBD medication use on these outcomes. DESIGN: We performed a multicentre retrospective study in The Netherlands. Women with IBD who gave birth between 1999 and 2018 were enrolled from 20 participating hospitals. Information regarding disease characteristics, medication use, lifestyle, pregnancy outcomes and long-term health outcomes of children was retrieved from mothers and medical charts. After consent of both parents, outcomes until 5 years were also collected from general practitioners. Our primary aim was to assess infection rate and our secondary aims were to assess adverse reactions to vaccinations, growth, autoimmune diseases and malignancies. RESULTS: We included 1000 children born to 626 mothers (381 (61%) Crohn's disease, 225 (36%) ulcerative colitis and 20 (3%) IBD unclassified). In total, 196 (20%) had intrauterine exposure to anti-tumour necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) (60 with concomitant thiopurine) and 240 (24%) were exposed to thiopurine monotherapy. The 564 children (56%) not exposed to anti-TNF-α and/or thiopurine served as control group. There was no association between adverse long-term health outcomes and in utero exposure to IBD treatment. We did find an increased rate of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) in case thiopurine was used during the pregnancy without affecting birth outcomes and long-term health outcomes of children. All outcomes correspond with the general age-adjusted population. CONCLUSION: In our study, we found no association between in utero exposure to anti-TNF-α and/or thiopurine and the long-term outcomes antibiotic-treated infections, severe infections needing hospital admission, adverse reactions to vaccinations, growth failure, autoimmune diseases and malignancies

Intervju: akademik Jakša Barbić

Over the past 20 years evidence has accumulated confirming the immunomodulatory role of the appendix in ulcerative colitis (UC). This led to the idea that appendectomy might alter the clinical course of established UC. The objective of this body of research is to evaluate the short-term and medium-term efficacy of appendectomy to maintain remission in patients with UC, and to establish the acceptability and cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to standard treatment. These paired phase III multicenter prospective randomised studies will include patients over 18 years of age with an established diagnosis of ulcerative colitis and a disease relapse within 12 months prior to randomisation. Patients need to have been medically treated until complete clinical (Mayo score <3) and endoscopic (Mayo score 0 or 1) remission. Patients will then be randomised 1:1 to a control group (maintenance 5-ASA treatment, no appendectomy) or elective laparoscopic appendectomy plus maintenance treatment. The primary outcome measure is the one year cumulative UC relapse rate - defined both clinically and endoscopically as a total Mayo-score ≥5 with endoscopic subscore of 2 or 3. Secondary outcomes that will be assessed include the number of relapses per patient at 12 months, the time to first relapse, health related quality of life and treatment costs, and number of colectomies in each arm. The ACCURE and ACCURE-UK trials will provide evidence on the role and acceptability of appendectomy in the treatment of ulcerative colitis and the effects of appendectomy on the disease course. NTR2883 ; ISRCTN5652301

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus endoscopic mucosal resection for large rectal adenomas (TREND-study)

Background: Recent non-randomized studies suggest that extended endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is equally effective in removing large rectal adenomas as transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). If equally effective, EMR might be a more cost-effective approach as this strategy does not require expensive equipment, general anesthesia and hospital admission. Furthermore, EMR appears to be associated with fewer complications. The aim of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of TEM and EMR for the resection of large rectal adenomas. Methods/design. Multicenter randomized trial among 15 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients with a rectal adenoma 3 cm, located between 115 cm ab ano, will be randomized to a TEM- or EMR-treatment strategy. For TEM, patients will be treated under general anesthesia, adenomas will be dissected en-bloc by a full-thickness excision, and patients will be admitted to the hospital. For EMR, no or conscious sedation is used, lesions will be resected through the submucosal plane i

Patients' perception of colonoscopy: patients with inflammatory bowel disease and irritable bowel syndrome experience the largest burden

Colonoscopy is a frequently performed procedure worldwide with a negative perception, leading to reluctance to undergo the procedure. Perceptions could differ depending on the specific indication for the colonoscopy. To compare patient satisfaction with the colonoscopy procedure between five different patient groups: inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), familial predisposition for cancer, adenoma/carcinoma surveillance, symptoms suggestive of cancer, and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). A prospective questionnaire study was carried out in two regional hospitals and two tertiary teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. A total of 797 consecutive patients scheduled for colonoscopy between October 2009 and June 2010, 146 (18%) IBD, 153 (19%) adenoma or carcinoma surveillance, 104 (13%) familial predisposition, 280 (35%) symptoms suggestive of cancer, and 114 (14%) IBS-like symptoms, were included. Two questionnaires were administered: one on the day of the procedure and another 6 weeks after the procedure. The main outcome measurements were embarrassment, pain, burden, most burdensome aspect, and overall level of satisfaction. Patients with IBD and IBS reported significantly more embarrassment and burden from the bowel preparation phase (P=0.040 and 0.018, respectively) and more pain during the colonoscopy procedure (P=0.018). This difference in pain was also observed when adjusting for volume of sedation administered, familiarity with the endoscopist, duration of the colonoscopy, or whether or not an intervention was performed. All patient groups were less satisfied with the procedure at 6 weeks than directly after the colonoscopy; they recalled more embarrassment and burden, but less pain. Patient groups, defined by indication for colonoscopy, experience the colonoscopy procedure differentl

Diagnostic Yield of One-Time Colonoscopy vs One-Time Flexible Sigmoidoscopy vs Multiple Rounds of Mailed Fecal Immunohistochemical Tests in Colorectal Cancer Screening

Background & Aims: We compared the diagnostic yields of colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Methods: A total of 30,007 asymptomatic persons, 50–74 years old, were invited for CRC screening in the Netherlands. Participants were assigned to groups that received 4 rounds of FIT (mailed to 15,046 participants), once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy (n = 8407), or once-only colonoscopy (n = 6600). Patients with positive results from the FIT (≥10 μg Hb/g feces) were referred for colonoscopy. Patients who underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy were referred for colonoscopy if they had a polyp of ≥10 mm; adenoma with ≥25% villous histology or high-grade dysplasia; sessile serrated adenoma; ≥3 adenomas; ≥20 hyperplastic polyps; or invasive CRC. The primary outcome was number of advanced neoplasia detected (diagnostic yield) by each test. Secondary outcomes were number of colonoscopies needed to detect advanced neoplasia and number of interval CRCs found during each primary screening test. Patients with interval CRCs were found through linkage with Netherlands Cancer Registry. Advanced neoplasia were defined as CRC, adenomas ≥ 10 mm, adenomas with high-grade dysplasia, or adenomas with a villous component of at least 25%. Results: The cumulative participation rate was significantly higher for FIT screening (73%) than for flexible sigmoidoscopy (31%; P < .001) or colonoscopy (24%; P < .001). The percentage of colonoscopies among invitees was higher for colonoscopy (24%) compared to FIT (13%; P < .001) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (3%; P < .001). In the intention to screen analysis, the cumulative diagnostic yield of advanced neoplasia was higher with FIT screening (4.5%; 95% CI 4.2–4.9) than with colonoscopy (2.2%; 95% CI, 1.8–2.6) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (2.3%; 95% CI, 2.0–2.7). In the as-screened analysis, the cumulative yield of advanced neoplasia was higher for endoscopic screening with colonoscopy (9.1%; 95% CI, 7.7–10.7) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (7.4%; 95% CI, 6.5–8.5) than with the FIT (6.1%; 95% CI, 5.7–6.6). All 3 screening strategies detected a similar proportion of patients with CRC. Follow-up times differed for each test (median 8.3 years for FIT and flexible sigmoidoscopy and 5.8 years for colonoscopy). Proportions of patients that developed interval CRC were 0.13% for persons with a negative result from FIT, 0.09% for persons with a negative result from flexible sigmoidoscopy, and 0.01% for persons with a negative result from colonoscopy. Conclusions: Mailed multiple-round FITs detect significantly more advanced neoplasia, on a population level, compared with once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy screening. Significantly fewer colonoscopies are required by individuals screened by multiple FITs. Trialregister.nl numbers: first round, NTR1096; second round and additional invitees, NTR1512; fourth round, NTR5874; COCOS trial NTR1829

Quality of Barrett's surveillance in The Netherlands: a standardized review of endoscopy and pathology reports

OBJECTIVE: The quality of Barrett's surveillance relies on an adequate endoscopic inspection, obtaining a sufficient number of biopsy specimens, good communication of the endoscopic findings to the pathologist, and an accurate description of the histological findings by the pathologist. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of Barrett's surveillance in daily practice in The Netherlands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A structured scoring list was developed to evaluate systematically the quality of endoscopy and pathology reports. From 15 hospitals, endoscopy reports and corresponding pathology reports were selected randomly and evaluated by two observers. In case of disagreement, the observers re-evaluated the reports in a consensus meeting. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty cases were evaluated. The adherence to current standard biopsy protocols (four quadrant biopsies every 2 cm) decreased with increasing Barrett's length: 0-5 cm: 79%; 5-10 cm: 50%; 10-15 cm: 30%. The indication for the endoscopy was mentioned in 28% of the pathology reports, in 4% the presence/absence of oesophagitis was communicated, and in 19% the location and/or aetiology of biopsies was described. The presence/absence of dysplasia was mentioned in 93% of pathology reports. CONCLUSION: Endoscopy reports and pathology reports in current practice do not include all relevant information for an adequate Barrett's surveillance. In short Barrett's oesophagus, the adherence to current standard biopsy protocols is acceptable, but in longer segments (with a higher risk for neoplastic progression) this is clearly insufficient. The communication between endoscopists and pathologist is suboptima