4 research outputs found

    Adenoma Detection by Endocuff-Assisted versus Standard Colonoscopy in Routine Practice: A Cluster-Randomised Crossover Trial

    No full text
    International audienceOBJECTIVE: Endocuff Vision (ECV) is the second generation of a device designed to improve polyp detection. The aim of this study was to evaluate its impact on adenoma detection rate (ADR) in routine colonoscopy. DESIGN: This cluster-randomised crossover trial compared Endocuff-assisted (ECV+) with standard (ECV-) colonoscopy. Two teams of 11 endoscopists each with prior ECV experience, balanced in terms of basal ADR, gender and case volume were compared. In randomised fashion, the teams started with ECV+ or ECV- and switched group after inclusion of half of the cases. The main outcome criterion was ADR difference between ECV+ and ECV-. Subgroup analysis was done for physicians with low and high ADR (< or ≥q 25%). RESULTS: During two periods of 20 and 21 weeks, respectively, the 22 endoscopists included 2058 patients (1032 ECV- vs 1026 ECV+, both groups being comparable). Overall ADR for both groups taken together was higher with ECV (39.2%) than without (29.4%; p<0.001) irrespective of the sequence of use (ECV+ or ECV- first), but mostly in adenomas <1\,cm. In the physician subgroup analysis, only high detectors showed a significant ADR increase (from 31% to 41%, p<0.001), while the increase in the low detectors was not significant (from 24% to 30%, p=0.11). ECV had a positive impact in all colonic locations, except for the rectum. No ECV- related complication was reported. CONCLUSION: We observed a significant ADR difference of approximately 10% by the use of ECV. By subgroup analysis, this increase was significant only in physicians classified as high detectors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03344055)

    Rilpivirine in HIV-1-positive women initiating pregnancy: to switch or not to switch?

    No full text
    International audienceBackgroundSafety data about rilpivirine use during pregnancy remain scarce, and rilpivirine plasma concentrations are reduced during second/third trimesters, with a potential risk of viral breakthroughs. Thus, French guidelines recommend switching to rilpivirine-free combinations (RFCs) during pregnancy.ObjectivesTo describe the characteristics of women initiating pregnancy while on rilpivirine and to compare the outcomes for virologically suppressed subjects continuing rilpivirine until delivery versus switching to an RFC.MethodsIn the ANRS-EPF French Perinatal cohort, we included women on rilpivirine at conception in 2010–18. Pregnancy outcomes were compared between patients continuing versus interrupting rilpivirine. In women with documented viral suppression (<50 copies/mL) before 14 weeks of gestation (WG) while on rilpivirine, we compared the probability of viral rebound (≥50 copies/mL) during pregnancy between subjects continuing rilpivirine versus those switching to RFC.ResultsAmong 247 women included, 88.7% had viral suppression at the beginning of pregnancy. Overall, 184 women (74.5%) switched to an RFC (mostly PI/ritonavir-based regimens) at a median gestational age of 8.0 WG. Plasma HIV-1 RNA nearest delivery was <50 copies/mL in 95.6% of women. Among 69 women with documented viral suppression before 14 WG, the risk of viral rebound was higher when switching to RFCs than when continuing rilpivirine (20.0% versus 0.0%, P = 0.046). Delivery outcomes were similar between groups (overall birth defects, 3.8/100 live births; pregnancy losses, 2.0%; preterm deliveries, 10.6%). No HIV transmission occurred.ConclusionsIn virologically suppressed women initiating pregnancy, continuing rilpivirine was associated with better virological outcome than changing regimen. We did not observe a higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes

    High Risk of Anal and Rectal Cancer in Patients With Anal and/or Perianal Crohn’s Disease

    No full text
    International audienceBackground & AimsLittle is known about the magnitude of the risk of anal and rectal cancer in patients with anal and/or perineal Crohn’s disease. We aimed to assess the risk of anal and rectal cancer in patients with Crohn’s perianal disease followed up in the Cancers Et Surrisque Associé aux Maladies Inflammatoires Intestinales En France (CESAME) cohort.MethodsWe collected data from 19,486 patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) enrolled in the observational CESAME study in France, from May 2004 through June 2005; 14.9% of participants had past or current anal and/or perianal Crohn’s disease. Subjects were followed up for a median time of 35 months (interquartile range, 29–40 mo). To identify risk factors for anal cancer in the total CESAME population, we performed a case-control study in which participants were matched for age and sex.ResultsAmong the total IBD population, 8 patients developed anal cancer and 14 patients developed rectal cancer. In the subgroup of 2911 patients with past or current anal and/or perianal Crohn’s lesions at cohort entry, 2 developed anal squamous-cell carcinoma, 3 developed perianal fistula–related adenocarcinoma, and 6 developed rectal cancer. The corresponding incidence rates were 0.26 per 1000 patient-years for anal squamous-cell carcinoma, 0.38 per 1000 patient-years for perianal fistula–related adenocarcinoma, and 0.77 per 1000 patient-years for rectal cancer. Among the 16,575 patients with ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease without anal or perianal lesions, the incidence rate of anal cancer was 0.08 per 1000 patient-years and of rectal cancer was 0.21 per 1000 patient-years. Among factors tested by univariate conditional regression (IBD subtype, disease duration, exposure to immune-suppressive therapy, presence of past or current anal and/or perianal lesions), the presence of past or current anal and/or perianal lesions at cohort entry was the only factor significantly associated with development of anal cancer (odds ratio, 11.2; 95% CI, 1.18-551.51; P = .03).ConclusionsIn an analysis of data from the CESAME cohort in France, patients with anal and/or perianal Crohn’s disease have a high risk of anal cancer, including perianal fistula–related cancer, and a high risk of rectal cancer
    corecore