Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Dig Dis ; 2022 Nov 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20238152

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care and education might differ around Europe. Therefore, we conducted this European Variation In IBD PracticE suRvey (VIPER) to investigate potential differences between countries. METHODS: This trainee-initiated survey, run through SurveyMonkey®, consisted of 47 questions inquiring basic demographics, IBD training, and clinical care. Results were compared according to gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, for which countries were divided into 2 groups (low/high income, according to the World Bank). RESULTS: The online survey was completed by 1285 participants from 40 European countries, with a majority of specialists (65.3%) working in academic institutions (50.4%). Significant differences in IBD-specific training (55.9% vs. 38.4%), as well as availability of IBD units (58.4% vs. 39.7%) and multidisciplinary meetings (73.2% vs. 40.1%) were observed between respondees from high and low GDP countries (p<0.0001). In high GDP countries, IBD nurses are more common (85.9% vs. 36.0%), also mirrored by more nurse-led IBD clinics (40.6% vs. 13.7%; p<0.0001). IBD dieticians (33.4% vs. 16.5%) and psychologists (16.8% vs. 7.5%) are mainly present in high GDP countries (p<0.0001). In the current COVID era, telemedicine is available in 73.2% vs. 54.1% of the high/low GDP countries respectively (p<0.0001). Treat-to-target approaches are implemented everywhere (85.0%), though access to biologicals and small molecules differs significantly. CONCLUSION: Much variability in IBD practice exists across Europe, with marked differences between high vs. low GDP countries. Further work is required to help address some of these inequalities, aiming to improve and standardize IBD care and training across Europe.

2.
Scand J Gastroenterol ; 58(7): 798-804, 2023 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2230091

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic conditioned the optimal timing of some endoscopic procedures. ESGE guidelines recommend replacement or removal of the plastic biliary stents within 3-6 months to reduce the risk of complications. Our aim was to analyse the outcomes of patients who had delayed plastic biliary stent removal following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the pandemic era. METHODS: Retrospective study including consecutive ERCPs with plastic biliary stent placement between January 2019 and December 2021. Delayed removal was defined as presence of biliary stent >6 months after ERCP. The evaluated outcomes were stent migration, stent dysfunction, obstructive jaundice, cholangitis, acute pancreatitis, hospitalization, and biliary pathology-related mortality. RESULTS: One-hundred and twenty ERCPs were included, 56.7% male patients, with a mean age of 69.4 ± 15.7 years. Indications for plastic biliary stent insertion were choledocholithiasis (72.5%), benign biliary stricture (20.0%), and post-cholecystectomy fistula (7.5%). Delayed stent removal occurred in 32.5% of the cases. The median time to stent removal was 3.5 ± 1.3 months for early removal and 8.6 ± 3.1 months for delayed removal. Patients who had delayed stent removal did not have a significantly higher frequency of stent migration (20.5 vs 11.1%, p = 0.17), stent dysfunction (17.9 vs 13.6%, p = 0.53), hospitalization (17.9 vs 14.8%, p = 0.66), obstructive jaundice (2.6 vs 0.0%, p = 0.33), cholangitis (10.3 vs 13.6%, p = 0.77), acute pancreatitis (0.0 vs 1.2%, p = 1.0), or biliary pathology-related mortality (2.6 vs 1.2%, p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Delayed plastic biliary stent removal does not seem to have a negative impact on patients' outcomes. In the current pandemic situation, while scheduled endoscopic procedures may have to be postponed, elective removal of plastic biliary stents can be safely deferred.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cholangitis , Cholestasis , Jaundice, Obstructive , Pancreatitis , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Jaundice, Obstructive/etiology , Retrospective Studies , Plastics , Acute Disease , Pandemics , Pancreatitis/etiology , Pancreatitis/complications , COVID-19/complications , SARS-CoV-2 , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde/adverse effects , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde/methods , Cholestasis/etiology , Cholangitis/epidemiology , Cholangitis/etiology , Stents/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
3.
Inflamm Bowel Dis ; 2022 Sep 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2232829

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may lead to the development of the novel coronavirus disease (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]). Scarce data are available regarding safety and efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients, which may present differences between subgroups. Lower humoral immunological response could require additional booster injections. METHODS: This is a prospective study including adult patients with IBD after complete vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection with BioNTech vaccine. Patients with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were excluded. A control group with healthy individuals matched for age and sex was also analyzed. Blood samples were collected 30 days after complete vaccination to quantify immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 in both groups. RESULTS: The final sample included 81 IBD and 32 non-IBD patients, 55 (48.7%) of them women, with a mean age of 40.2 ±â€…13.0 years. From IBD patients, 58 (71.6%) had Crohn's disease and 23 (28.4%) had ulcerative colitis. IBD patients had significantly lower median anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels when compared with the control group (6479 [interquartile range (IQR) 1830-11883, 10 053] AU/mL vs 13 061 [IQR 2826-21427, 15 539] AU/mL; P = .003). Regarding IBD medication, significant lower levels of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies when compared with control subjects were observed in patients treated with thiopurines (5423 [IQR 3109-13369, 10 260] AU/mL; P = .011), methotrexate (834 [IQR 507-3467, 4155] AU/mL; P = .002), anti-tumor necrosis factor α agents (5065 [IQR 1033-11669, 10 636] AU/mL; P = .001), and corticosteroids (548 AU/mL; P = .001). The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination was also significantly higher in patients treated with these agents. CONCLUSIONS: IBD patients treated with immunomodulators, anti-tumor necrosis factor α agents and corticosteroids presented significantly lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels following complete vaccination when compared with healthy control subjects. These findings support the benefit of additional booster injections in this population.


This is a prospective study quantifying antibody titers against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 after complete vaccination in adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Immunomodulators, infliximab, and corticosteroid treatment were associated with lower antibody levels. This could support the benefit of an additional booster injection in this population.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL