Effect of budesonide enema on remission and relapse rate in distal ulcerative colitis and proctitis.

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticosteroid enemas are equally effective as 5-ASA enemas in the treatment of active distal ulcerative colitis (UC). With the introduction of budesonide, the risk of systemic side effects may be reduced. We investigated whether budesonide enema, 2 mg/100 ml, administered twice daily (b.i.d.) could increase the remission rate in comparison with the once daily (o.d.) standard regimen. Furthermore, we evaluated whether 2 mg budesonide enema, given twice weekly, could have a relapse preventing effect. METHODS: 149 patients with active distal UC were treated in a controlled, double-blind multicentre study with two parallel groups: placebo enema in the morning and budesonide enema in the evening (i.e. 2 mg/day) or budesonide enema b.i.d. (i.e. 4 mg/day) until remission (absence of clinical symptoms and endoscopic healing) or at most 8 weeks. Patients in remission were randomized to either budesonide enema or placebo enema twice weekly for 24 weeks or until relapse. RESULTS: The remission rates at 4 weeks were 33% for o.d. and 41% for b.i.d. regimens (NS) and correspondingly 51% and 54% at 8 weeks (NS). The b.i.d. group had an increased frequency of impaired adrenal function, 32% versus 4.8% (P = 0.001). The relapse rates during maintenance treatment with budesonide enema and placebo were 15% versus 24% after 8 weeks, 31% versus 27% after 16 weeks and 41% versus 51% after 24 weeks (NS). CONCLUSION: Budesonide enema 2 mg o.d. appears to be the optimal dosage in active distal UC. We could not show that budesonide enema twice weekly is sufficient to maintain remission.

Oral budesonide versus prednisolone in patients with active extensive and left-sided ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Systemic glucocorticosteroids (GCSs) have proven efficacy in active ulcerative colitis but cause undesired systemic side effects. Therefore, new GCSs with high topical activity and a high rate of metabolism may be of clinical value in this condition. The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy and safety of the topically acting GCS budesonide in an oral controlled-release formulation in extensive or left-sided, mild to moderately active ulcerative colitis. METHODS: A 9-week, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial was performed, and treatments with 10 mg budesonide or 40 mg prednisolone daily, both gradually tapered, were compared. Endoscopic improvement and effect on endogenous plasma cortisol were assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were administered budesonide, and 38 patients were administered prednisolone. Mean endoscopic scores improved significantly in both groups but without difference between the groups. Five patients in the budesonide group and 7 patients in the prednisolone group deteriorated and were withdrawn from the study. Morning plasma cortisol levels were suppressed in the prednisolone group (entry, 449 nmol/L; 2 weeks, 116 nmol/L; 4 weeks, 195 nmol/L) but were unchanged in the budesonide group. CONCLUSIONS: The GCS budesonide administered in an oral controlled-release formulation seems to give an overall treatment result in active ulcerative colitis approaching that of prednisolone but without suppression of plasma cortisol levels. This concept merits further evaluation.

Budesonide versus prednisolone retention enemas in active distal ulcerative colitis.

METHODS: Efficacy and safety of the topically acting glucocorticosteroid budesonide retention enema (2.3 mg/115 mL) were compared with prednisolone disodium phosphate enema (31.25 mg/125 mL) in patients with active distal ulcerative colitis. The study was a randomized, multicentre trial, with two parallel groups and single-blind to the investigator. One hundred patients with active ulcerative colitis, not reaching beyond the splenic flexure as determined by endoscopy, were treated for up to 8 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were randomized to receive budesonide and 55 to prednisolone. Both treatment groups improved significantly in terms of endoscopic and histological scoring during the study, but there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Clinical remission, defined as no more than three daily bowel movements without blood and endoscopically non-inflamed mucosa, was achieved in 16% of the patients in the budesonide group after four weeks and in 24% in the prednisolone group (N.S.). After 8 weeks treatment the clinical remission rate in the groups had increased to 36% for budesonide and 47% for prednisolone (N.S.). Mean morning plasma cortisol levels were unchanged in the budesonide group, whereas they were significantly suppressed in the prednisolone group after 2, 4 and 8 weeks (P < 0.0001). Side effects were mild and rare in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with budesonide enema in active distal ulcerative colitis was comparable, regarding efficacy, to treatment with conventional prednisolone enema. A prolongation of the treatment time from 4 to 8 weeks doubled the clinical remission rate in both groups. However, budesonide may be preferable to prednisolone since it causes less systemic effects as reflected by a lack of plasma cortisol suppression.

A steroid enema, budesonide, lacking systemic effects for the treatment of distal ulcerative colitis or proctitis.

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether budesonide enema (2 mg/100 ml) had a significantly better effect than placebo in the treatment of distal ulcerative colitis or proctitis. The trial was of controlled, randomized, double-blind design and included 41 treated patients. The treatment time was 4 weeks, with revisits after 2 and 4 weeks. If no improvement was seen, the patient could be switched over to open-label therapy with budesonide enema. Sigmoidoscopy, histology, blood chemistry, and diary cards were used for estimating the effect of treatment. The results showed that budesonide was superior to placebo. Sigmoidoscopy and biopsy scores improved significantly (p less than 0.01) in budesonide-treated patients compared with placebo. Significantly more patients switched over to open budesonide treatment in the placebo group owing to lack of efficacy compared with budesonide (p less than 0.001). No drug-related adverse experiences occurred, and there was no decrease in endogenous morning plasma cortisol levels. It is concluded that budesonide enema appears to be an effective and safe treatment for distal ulcerative colitis and proctitis.

Occult radiopaque jaw lesions in familial adenomatous polyposis.

Osteomatous jaw lesions have been reported to occur in connection with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) of the intestines. The disease is fatal if not treated. The aim of this investigation was to study the occurrence of bone jaw lesions in Swedish families, where some family members have developed FAP, in order to evaluate if these bone changes may be regarded as clinical markers of the disease. 132 individuals from ten families with FAP and a matched control group of 250 individuals were examined. Osteomatous lesions were diagnosed in 24 per cent in the FAP families and in 2 per cent in the controls. Individuals with verified FAP showed an increased occurrens of jaw lesions. Also in family members without verified FAP, first-degree relatives and other relatives, showed a significant higher incidence of osteomatous jaw lesions compared to the controls. Our results suggest that osteomatous jaw lesions in families with FAP are of predictive significance.

Blood pressure changes in the marginal artery of the colon following occlusion of the inferior mesenteric artery.

The perfusion pressure in the marginal artery of the descending colon was measured continuously at laparotomy in eight patients and the effect of sudden occlusion of the inferior mesenteric artery recorded. Three patients with ulcerative colitis, all in their early 30s, and five elderly patients with colonic or rectal carcinoma were studied. In all patients occlusion caused an initial and marked pressure drop, which remained reduced at a critically low level in two of the elderly patients. Such a reduction in perfusion pressure is probably still insufficient to interfere with the nourishment of the terminal part of the colon provided that the systemic pressure is kept at a normal level. However, since in many patients there is a sharp drop in systemic blood pressure during the recovery phase after surgery, it appears likely that the perfusion pressure in the marginal artery may in those cases be insufficient to maintain an adequate blood flow to the colon despite the inherent tendency of "auto-regulation" in this vascular bed. The results of the present study indicate that, contrary to previous belief, ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery may increase the risk of ischaemia in the terminal part of the descending colon, leading to anastomotic dehiscence after anterior resection, or sloughing after a "pull-through" operation. This complication could probably be prevented by a more generous resection of the sigmoid and descending colon, thus reducing the length of the anastomosis formed by the arc of Riolan and by careful maintenance of an adequate blood pressure during the recovery phase.

The development of "stagnant loop" syndrome following surgery for peptic ulcer disease.

Although gastric resection may cause a variety of functional gastrointestinal disorders, malabsorption is rare. When such a disturbance occurs other complicating factors are mostly involved. Two patients who developed a severe malabsorption after partial gastric resection are presented. They both had the prerequisites for intestinal stasis--one had small bowel diverticula and the other a "blind loop" after previous surgery. Their malabsorption was cured by surgical correction of stasis.