Recommendations of the Spanish Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis on the importance, screening and vaccination in inflammatory bowel disease patients. / Recomendaciones del Grupo Español de Trabajo en Enfermedad de Crohn y Colitis Ulcerosa sobre la importancia, el cribado y la vacunación en pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may require different immunosuppressive treatments throughout their illness. It is essential to assess the immunization status of patients at diagnosis or, if this is not possible, at least before the beginning of immunosuppressive therapy and, subsequently, administering the appropriate vaccines. Therefore, the aim of this work is to establish clear and concise recommendations on vaccination in patients with IBD in the different settings of our clinical practice including vaccination in children, during pregnancy, breastfeeding or on trips. This consensus document emphasises the differences between inactivated and attenuated vaccines and the different degrees of immunosuppression and correlates them with the administration of both mandatory and optional vaccines recommended to our patients with IBD. Finally, as a summary, 17 recommendations are established based on the available scientific evidence and expert opinion. A multidisciplinary team with extensive experience in IBD and vaccination, made up of specialists in gastroenterology, paediatrics, nursing and pharmacy, has participated in the preparation of these recommendations of the Spanish Working Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis.

The EPAGE guidelines are not an effective strategy for managing colonoscopies during the COVID-19 pandemic☆ EPAGE no es una estrategia eficaz para la gestión de colonoscopias durante la pandemia por COVID-19

Introduction The pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has had a serious impact on the functioning of gastrointestinal endoscopy Units. The Asociación Española de Gastroenterología [Spanish Association of Gastroenterology] (AEG) and the Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva [Spanish Association of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy] (SEED) have proposed the EPAGE guidelines for managing postponed colonoscopies. Objective To evaluate the EPAGE guidelines as a management tool compared to the immunologic faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) and compared to risk score (RS) that combines age, sex and the iFOBT for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and significant bowel disease (SBD). Methods A prospective, single-centre study enrolling 743 symptomatic patients referred for a diagnostic colonoscopy. Each order was classified according to the EPAGE guidelines as appropriate, indeterminate or inappropriate. Patients underwent an iFOBT and had their RS calculated. Results The iFOBT (P < .001), but not the EPAGE guidelines (P = .742), was an independent predictive factor of risk of CRC. The ROC AUCs for the EPAGE guidelines, the iFOBT and the RS were 0.61 (95%CI 0.49−0.75), 0.95 (0.93−0.97) and 0.90 (0.87−0.93) for CRC, and 0.55 (0.49−0.61), 0.75 (0.69−0.813) and 0.78 (0.73−0.83) for SBD, respectively. The numbers of colonoscopies needed to detect a case of CRC and a case of SBD were 38 and 7 for the EPAGE guidelines, 7 and 2 for the iFOBT, and 19 and 4 for a RS ≥ 5 points, respectively. Conclusion The EPAGE guidelines, unlike the iFOBT, is not suitable for screening candidate patients for a diagnostic colonoscopy to detect CRC. The iFOBT, in combination with age and sex, is the most suitable strategy for managing demand for endoscopy in a restricted-access situation.

The EPAGE guidelines are not an effective strategy for managing colonoscopies during the COVID-19 pandemic. / EPAGE no es una estrategia eficaz para la gestión de colonoscopias durante la pandemia por COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has had a serious impact on the functioning of gastrointestinal endoscopy Units. The Asociación Española de Gastroenterología (AEG) and the Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva (SEED) have proposed the EPAGE guidelines for managing postponed colonoscopies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the EPAGE guidelines as a management tool compared to the immunologic faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) and compared to risk score (RS) that combines age, sex and the iFOBT for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and significant bowel disease (SBD). METHODS: A prospective, single-centre study enrolling 743 symptomatic patients referred for a diagnostic colonoscopy. Each order was classified according to the EPAGE guidelines as appropriate, indeterminate or inappropriate. Patients underwent an iFOBT and had their RS calculated. RESULTS: The iFOBT (p<0.001), but not the EPAGE guidelines (p = 0.742), was an independent predictive factor of risk of CRC. The ROC AUCs for the EPAGE guidelines, the iFOBT and the RS were 0.61 (95% CI 0.49-0.75), 0.95 (0.93-0.97) and 0.90 (0.87-0.93) for CRC, and 0.55 (0.49-0.61), 0.75 (0.69-0.813) and 0.78 (0.73-0.83) for SBD, respectively. The numbers of colonoscopies needed to detect a case of CRC and a case of SBD were 38 and seven for the EPAGE guidelines, seven and two for the iFOBT, and 19 and four for a RS ≥5 points, respectively. CONCLUSION: The EPAGE guidelines, unlike the iFOBT, is not suitable for screening candidate patients for a diagnostic colonoscopy to detect CRC. The iFOBT, in combination with age and sex, is the most suitable strategy for managing demand for endoscopy in a restricted-access situation.