Risk of venous thromboembolism with a central venous catheter in hospitalized Japanese patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a propensity score-matched cohort study

Background/Aims@#Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Western countries, although it is selectively administered to high-risk patients in East Asia. A central venous catheter (CVC) is commonly placed in patients with IBD. Although CVC placement is considered a risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE), the degree of increased risk in patients with IBD is uncertain. This study aimed to identify the risk of VTE with CVC placement in hospitalized Japanese patients with IBD without thromboprophylaxis. @*Methods@#This retrospective cohort study included patients with ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease who were admitted for disease flares at Keio University Hospital between January 2016 and December 2020. Patients who already had thrombosis or were administered any antithrombotic treatment on admission were excluded. VTE development during the hospitalization was surveyed, and VTE risk associated with CVC indwelling was estimated using propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses. @*Results@#Altogether, 497 hospitalized patients with IBD (ulcerative colitis, 327; Crohn’s disease, 170) were enrolled. VTE developed in 9.30% (12/129) of catheterized patients and in 0.82% (3/368) of non-catheterized patients. The propensity score matching yielded 127 matched pairs of patients. The catheterized group demonstrated higher odds for VTE than the non-catheterized group (odds ratio, 13.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.68–102.70). A similar result was obtained in the inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis (odds ratio, 11.02; 95% confidence interval, 2.64–46.10). @*Conclusions@#CVC placement is a major risk factor for VTE among hospitalized Japanese patients with IBD without thromboprophylaxis.

Fecal microbiota transplantation for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection in a patient with ulcerative colitis

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has been reported as a safe and effective therapy in patients with refractory and recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). FMT has also been reported as a promising therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Both, CDI and UC, are believed to be caused by dysbiosis, such as altered compositions or decreased diversity of the intestinal microbiota. This report describes a patient with UC in remission with a second recurrent episode of CDI, who was treated with FMT. A single FMT performed via colonoscopy completely resolved the patient's diarrhea and eradicated C. difficile bacteriologically without any severe complications. Molecular biological analysis of the patient's fecal microbiota showed that FMT could dramatically change the altered composition of intestinal microbiota and restore its diversity. Despite the restoration of the intestinal microbiota, FMT could not prevent a relapse of UC in this patient. However, it improved the intestinal symptoms of CDI and could prevent further recurrences of CDI.

Single fecal microbiota transplantation failed to change intestinal microbiota and had limited effectiveness against ulcerative colitis in Japanese patients

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Recent developments in analytical techniques including next-generation sequencing have clarified the correlation between intestinal microbiota and inflammatory bowel disease. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) is proposed as a potential approach to resolving their dysbiosis; however, its safety and efficacy have not been confirmed. This single-arm, open-label, non-randomized study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of FMT for Japanese patients with UC as the first registered clinical trial in Japan. METHODS: We enrolled 10 patients with active UC despite medical therapy. The donors were the patients' relatives and were carefully screened for infectious diseases. Fecal material was administered via colonoscopy, and the primary endpoint was the presence or absence of serious adverse events related to FMT. The secondary endpoint was a change in partial Mayo score at 12 weeks post-FMT. Scores ≤2 were considered a clinical response. Fecal samples were collected to follow changes in gut microbiota, while extracted complementary DNA were analyzed by a next-generation sequencer. We obtained written informed consent from all patients and donors. This study was approved by our Institutional Review Board and is registered in the University hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN 000012814). RESULTS: Five patients with moderate disease and five with severe disease were enrolled. No severe adverse effects were observed. One patient achieved clinical response; however, none of the patients' microbiota diversity recovered to the donor levels. CONCLUSIONS: The use of single FMT for UC was safe; however, we failed to show its clinical efficacy and potential to change the intestinal microbiota.