Initiation of vedolizumab did not provoke new-onset spondylarthritis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A prospective 24-week study with imaging assessments.

BACKGROUND: A temporal relationship between vedolizumab and new-onset spondyloarthritis (SpA) has been suggested. AIMS: We evaluated the relationship between vedolizumab initiation and development of new-onset SpA in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) through serial clinical evaluation and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: A single-centre prospective observational study of 24 patients with IBD. Patients were eligible if they had active ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease (CD), were initiating vedolizumab, had no prior history of arthritis or SpA and were suitable for serial MRI. A rheumatologist performed clinical evaluation prior to the first dose and 8 and 24 weeks. Axial MRI was evaluated by a blinded central reader and performed at baseline 8 and 24 weeks. RESULTS: Nine tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor-naïve patients (4 male; mean age 53.2 years; 6 UC; 3 CD) and eight TNF inhibitor-experienced patients (7 male; mean age 48 years; 3 UC; 5 CD) completed all assessments. No patients developed new features of axial arthritis or features of peripheral SpA (inflammatory oligoarthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, or psoriasis (nail, body, or scalp)). Both groups demonstrated a good intestinal response. CONCLUSION: Vedolizumab initiation did not induce new features of axial or peripheral SpA after 24 weeks of treatment in TNF inhibitor-experienced or TNF inhibitor-naive patients with IBD.

Propofol sedation does not improve measures of colonoscopy quality but increase cost - findings from a large population-based cohort study.

Background: Propofol is often used for sedation during colonoscopy. We assessed the impact of propofol sedation on colonoscopy related quality metrics and cost in a population-based cohort study. Methods: All colonoscopies performed at 21 hospitals in the province of Ontario, Canada, during an 18-month period, from April 1, 2017 to October 31, 2018, using either propofol or conscious sedation were evaluated. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR) and secondary outcomes were sessile serrated polyp detection rate (ssPDR), polyp detection rate (PDR), cecal intubation rate (CIR), and perforation rate. Binary outcomes were assessed using a modified Poisson regression model adjusted for clustering and potential confounders based on patient, procedure, and physician characteristics. Findings: A total of 46,634 colonoscopies were performed, of which 16,408 (35.2%) received propofol and 30,226 (64.8%) received conscious sedation. Compared to conscious sedation, the use of propofol was associated with a lower ADR (24.6% vs. 27.0%, p < 0.0001) but not ssPDR (5.0% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.26), PDR (40.5% vs 40.4%, p = 0.79), CIR (97.1% vs. 96.8%, p = 0.15) or perforation rate (0.04% vs. 0.06%, p = 0.45). On multi-variable analysis, propofol sedation was not associated with any differences in ADR (RR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.74-1.10, p = 0.30), ssPDR (RR = 1.20, 95% CI 0.90-1.60, p = 0.22), PDR (RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.90-1.11, p = 0.99), or CIR (RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.80-1.26, p = 0.99). The additional cost associated with propofol sedation was $12,730,496 for every 100,000 cases. Interpretation: The use of propofol sedation was not associated with improved colonoscopy related quality metrics but increased costs. The routine use of propofol for colonoscopy should be reevaluated. Funding: None.

Endoscopy Unit Level Interventions to Improve Adenoma Detection Rate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is inversely correlated with the risk of interval colon cancer and is a key target for quality improvement in endoscopy units. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions that can be implemented at the endoscopy unit level to improve ADRs. METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between January 1990 and December 2022 to identify relevant studies. Both randomized controlled trials and observational studies were eligible. Data for the primary outcome of ADR were analyzed and reported on the log-odds scale with 95% CIs using a random-effects meta-analysis model using the empiric Bayes estimator. RESULTS: From 10,778 initial citations, 34 studies were included in the meta-analysis comprising 371,041 procedures and 1501 endoscopists. The provision of report cards (odds ratio [OR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.13-1.45; P < .001) and the presence of an additional observer to identify polyps (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09-1.43; P = .002) were associated with significant increases in ADRs whereas multimodal interventions were borderline significant (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.00-1.40; P = .05) and withdrawal time monitoring was not associated significantly with an increase in ADRs (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.93-1.96; P = .11). CONCLUSIONS: The provision of report cards and the presence of an additional observer to identify polyps are associated with improved ADRs and should be considered for implementation in endoscopy facilities.

Clinical, Endoscopic, and Radiological Effectiveness of Ustekinumab in Bio-naïve Versus Bio-experienced Patients With Crohn's Disease: Real-world Experience From a Large Canadian Center.

INTRODUCTION: With the expanding therapeutic armamentarium for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), real-world data may help inform drug positioning. We assessed clinical, endoscopic, imaging, and biochemical response/remission outcomes in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) treated with ustekinumab in a large Canadian IBD center. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of CD patients was treated with ustekinumab. Clinical, endoscopic, radiological, and biochemical response and remission outcomes were stratified by prior biologic exposure status. Hazard ratios for biologic exposure status were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models and subgroup-specific incidence rates for healing. RESULTS: A total of 231 patients (55.9% female, median 45.8 years) were identified as receiving ustekinumab during the study period, with 2 patients subsequently excluded (N = 229). Of these patients, 79.0% (181 of 229) were bio-experienced, with 38.7% (70 of 181) having failed 1 biologic and 61.3% (111 of 181) having failed ≥2 biologics. At 3 months of follow-up after induction, clinical remission (Harvey-Bradshaw Index ≤4) was achieved by 59.1% (62 of 105) of bio-experienced patients and 79.4% (27 of 34) of bio-naïve patients (relative risk [RR], 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.70; P = .013). Endoscopic remission (absence of mucosal ulcers) was achieved in 37.9% (33 of 87) cases. Rate of endoscopic healing (either endoscopic response or remission) per 1000 person-months was 72.7 (95% CI, 42.4-125.1) and 50.2 (37.9-66.4); and the median time to endoscopic response was 8.4 months (95% CI, 6.4-9.8) and 15.4 months (95% CI, 10.3-17.9) in bio-naïve vs bio-experienced patients, respectively. Imaging response/remission and steroid-free remission rates were higher in bio-naïve patients. CONCLUSION: In this large real-world cohort of CD patients with complex phenotypes and high rates of prior biologic exposure, we observed that ustekinumab was effective and safe with higher rates of improvement in bio-naïve subjects across a range of end points.

In this large real-world study of patients with Crohn's Disease treated with ustekinumab, we observed high rates of clinical, endoscopic, radiological, and biochemical response and remission rates. Effectiveness was greater in bio-naïve compared with bio-experienced patients.

Existing Bowel Preparation Quality Scales Are Reliable in the Setting of Centralized Endoscopy Reading.

BACKGROUND: Development of bowel preparation products has been based upon colon cleansing rating by a local endoscopist. It is unclear how bowel preparation scales perform when centrally evaluated. AIMS: To evaluate the reliability of bowel preparation quality scales when assessed by central readers. METHODS: Four central readers evaluated 52 videos in triplicate, 2 weeks apart, during the entire endoscopic procedure (insertion/withdrawal of the colonoscope) and exclusively on colonoscope withdrawal using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), Chicago Bowel Preparation scale, Harefield Cleansing Scale, Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale (OBPQS), Aronchick score, a visual analogue scale, and additional items proposed in a modified Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness process. Reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficients (95% confidence interval) for inter-rater reliability of the quality scales ranged from 0.51 to 0.65 (consistent with moderate to substantial inter-rater reliability) during the entire procedure. Corresponding intraclass correlation coefficients for intra-rater reliability ranged from 0.69 to 0.77 (consistent with substantial intra-rater reliability). Reliability was highest in the right colon and lowest in the left colon. No differences were observed in reliability when assessed for the procedure overall (insertion/withdrawal) relative to assessment on withdrawal alone. CONCLUSION: All five bowel preparation quality scales had moderate to substantial inter-rater reliability. Panelists considered the Aronchick score too simplistic for clinical trials and recognized that assessment of residual fluid in the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale was not amenable to central assessment.

Sleep Disturbances, Bowel Movement Kinetics, and Travel Interruption With Bowel Preparation: A Bowel CLEANsing National Initiative Substudy.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated sleep disturbances, bowel movement (BM) kinetics, and travel experience with different bowel preparation regimens in a substudy of patients enrolled in a randomized multicenter Canadian clinical trial. METHODS: Patients scheduled to have a colonoscopy between 7:30 am and 10:30 am (early morning) were randomized to (i) 4-L single-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) given in the evening before, (ii) 2-L split-dose PEG (+bisacodyl 15 mg), or (iii) 4-L split-dose PEG. Patients scheduled to undergo a colonoscopy between 10:30 am and 4:30 pm (afternoon) were randomized to (iv) 2-L single-dose PEG (+bisacodyl 15 mg) in the morning, (v) 2-L split-dose PEG (+bisacodyl 15 mg), or (vi) 4-L split-dose PEG. Patients were asked to record information on BM kinetics, sleep, and travel to the endoscopy unit. Continuous and categorical variables were compared between groups using a Kruskal-Wallis test or χ 2 test, respectively. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed. RESULTS: Overall, 641 patients were included in this substudy. Patients undergoing early morning colonoscopies reported the most awakenings in the night when assigned to 4-L single-dose day-before PEG and the highest reduction in sleep hours when assigned to 4-L split-dose PEG. There were no significant between-group differences in urgent BMs, fecal incontinence episodes, or travel interruptions. Overall, 17% of those traveling for more than an hour had to stop for a BM during travel, with no significant difference between groups. DISCUSSION: Day-before and split-dose high-volume PEG regimens for colonoscopies scheduled before 10:30 am lead to the greatest sleep disturbance.

An Expert Consensus to Standardize Assessment of Bowel Cleansing for Clinical Trials of Bowel Preparations for Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Despite regular need for colonoscopy in patients with Crohn's disease (CD), the efficacy and tolerability of bowel preparation (BP) agents is rarely assessed in this population. Assessing BP quality with existing scales may be challenging in CD due to presence of inflammation, bowel resection, and strictures. AIMS: To provide recommendations for assessing BP quality in clinical trials for CD using a modified Research and Development/University of California, Los Angeles appropriateness process. METHODS: Based on systematic reviews and a literature search, 110 statements relating to BP quality assessment in CD were developed. A panel of 15 gastroenterologists rated the statements as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate using a 9-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Panelists considered it appropriate that central readers, either alone or with local assessment, score BP quality in clinical trials. Central readers should be trained on scoring BP quality and local endoscopists on performing high-quality video recording. Both endoscope insertion and withdrawal phases should be reviewed to score BP quality in each colonic segment and segments should align with endoscopic disease activity indices. The Harefield Cleansing Scale and the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale were considered appropriate. The final score should be calculated as the average of all visualized segments. Both total and worst segment scores should also be assessed. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a framework for assessing BP quality in patients with CD based on expert feedback. This framework could support the development or refinement of BP quality scales and the integration of BP quality assessment in future CD studies.

Decreased Infliximab Concentrations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Who Carry a Variable Number Tandem Repeat Polymorphism in the Neonatal Fc Receptor or Variant HLADQA1*05G>A Genotype.

BACKGROUND: Multiple variables contribute to variation in patient exposure and response to tumor necrosis factor alpha antagonist biologics such as infliximab. This study aimed to assess the association between maintenance-phase infliximab concentrations and genetic variation in HLADQA1*05G>A and fragment crystallisable (Fc) fragment of IgG receptor and transporter (FCGRT) among patients with inflammatory bowel disease. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out in participants with inflammatory bowel disease prescribed infliximab who were in the maintenance phase of treatment. Participants were genotyped for the presence of the FCGRT variable number tandem repeat (VNTR) and HLADQA1*05G>A (rs74291249). A point estimate of the infliximab trough concentration during the maintenance phase was determined using a standard enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for each patient. Other variables associated with infliximab pharmacokinetics were collected. RESULTS: A total of 156 participants with inflammatory bowel disease were included from 2 tertiary care centers affiliated with Western University, London, Canada. Median infliximab trough concentrations were lower in participants who carried the FCGRT VNTR 2/3 or 2/2 (4.14 µg/mL; interquartile range [IQR], 6.48 µg/mL) vs wild type individuals (7.00 µg/mL; IQR, 7.66; P = .0027). Median infliximab trough concentrations were significantly lower in participants who were HLADQA1*05G>A variant carriers (4.73µg/mL; IQR, 4.79) vs wild type individuals (7.85µg/mL; IQR, 7.44; P = .0006). A significant decrease in infliximab trough concentrations was seen in individuals who were dual carriers of variant polymorphisms in HLADQA1*05G>A and FCGRT VNTR (no variants, 8.96µg/mL; IQR, 6.84 vs one variant, 4.96 µg/mL; IQR, 4.95 vs dual variants, 0.86µg/mL; IQR, 5.82). CONCLUSION: FCGRT VNTR and HLADQA1*05G>A are associated with lower maintenance-phase infliximab concentrations, particularly among patients who carry both variants.

HLADQA1*05G>A and FCGRT VNTR are associated with lower maintenance-phase infliximab concentrations, particularly among patients who carry both variants.

Association of Trainee Participation in Colonoscopy Procedures With Quality Metrics.

Importance: Trainees routinely participate in colonoscopy procedures, yet whether their involvement is positively or negatively associated with procedural quality is unknown because prior studies involved small number of trainees and/or supervisors, lacked generalizability, and/or failed to adjust for potential confounders. Objective: To assess the association between trainee participation and colonoscopy quality metrics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter population-based cohort study was conducted at 21 academic and community hospitals between April 1, 2017, and October 31, 2018, among consecutive adult patients undergoing colonoscopy. Procedures performed by endoscopists who did not supervise trainees were excluded. Statistical analysis was performed from April 3, 2017, to October 31, 2018. Exposure: Participation by a trainee, defined as a resident or fellow enrolled in a gastroenterology or general surgery training program. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes were sessile serrated polyp detection rate (ssPDR), polyp detection rate (PDR), cecal intubation rate (CIR), and perforation rate. Results: A total of 35 499 colonoscopies (18 989 women [53.5%]; mean [SD] patient age, 60.0 [14.1] years) were performed by 71 physicians (mean [SD] time in practice, 14.0 [9.3] years); 5941 colonoscopies (16.7%) involved trainees. There were no significant differences in the ADR (26.4% vs 27.3%; P = .19), CIR (96.7% vs 97.2%; P = .07), and perforation rate (0.05% vs 0.06%; P = .82) when trainees participated vs when they did not participate, whereas the the ssPDR (4.4% vs 5.2%; P = .009) and PDR (39.2% vs 42.0%; P < .001) were significantly lower when trainees participated vs when they did not. After adjustment for potential confounders, the ADR (risk ratio [RR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.91-1.03; P = .30), PDR (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.93-1.04; P = .47), and CIR (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78-1.10; P = .38) were not associated with trainee participation, although the ssPDR remained significantly lower (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that trainee involvement during colonoscopy was associated with reduced ssPDR but not other colonoscopy outcome measures. Extra care should be exercised when examining the right colon when trainees are involved.

Comparison of Risk Scores for Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Clinical prediction models, or risk scores, can be used to risk stratify patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB), although the most discriminative score is unknown. Objective: To identify all LGIB risk scores available and compare their prognostic performance. Data Sources: A systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 1990, through August 31, 2021, was conducted. Non-English-language articles were excluded. Study Selection: Observational and interventional studies deriving or validating an LGIB risk score for the prediction of a clinical outcome were included. Studies including patients younger than 16 years or limited to a specific patient population or a specific cause of bleeding were excluded. Two investigators independently screened the studies, and disagreements were resolved by consensus. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were abstracted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline independently by 2 investigators and pooled using random-effects models. Main Outcomes and Measures: Summary diagnostic performance measures (sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC]) determined a priori were calculated for each risk score and outcome combination. Results: A total of 3268 citations were identified, of which 9 studies encompassing 12 independent cohorts and 4 risk scores (Oakland, Strate, NOBLADS [nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use, no diarrhea, no abdominal tenderness, blood pressure ≤100 mm Hg, antiplatelet drug use (nonaspirin), albumin <3.0 g/dL, disease score ≥2 (according to the Charlson Comorbidity Index), and syncope], and BLEED [ongoing bleeding, low systolic blood pressure, elevated prothrombin time, erratic mental status, and unstable comorbid disease]) were included in the meta-analysis. For the prediction of safe discharge, the AUROC for the Oakland score was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82-0.88). For major bleeding, the AUROC was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.90-0.95) for the Oakland score, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.69-0.77) for the Strate score, 0.58 (95% CI, 0.53-0.62) for the NOBLADS score, and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.61-0.69) for the BLEED score. For transfusion, the AUROC was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98-1.00) for the Oakland score and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.85-0.90) for the NOBLADS score. For hemostasis, the AUROC was 0.36 (95% CI, 0.32-0.40) for the Oakland score, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79-0.85) for the Strate score, and 0.24 (95% CI, 0.20-0.28) for the NOBLADS score. Conclusions and Relevance: The Oakland score was the most discriminative LGIB risk score for predicting safe discharge, major bleeding, and need for transfusion, whereas the Strate score was best for predicting need for hemostasis. This study suggests that these scores can be used to predict outcomes from LGIB and guide clinical care accordingly.

High oncostatin M predicts lack of clinical remission for patients with inflammatory bowel disease on tumor necrosis factor α antagonists.

The interleukin-6 family cytokine, oncostatin-M (OSM) has been associated with response to tumor necrosis factor-α antagonists (anti-TNFs) in small cohorts of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We aimed to evaluate the association between plasma OSM concentrations and response to anti-TNFs (infliximab and adalimumab) in both ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). A retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients with IBD with a history of anti-TNF exposure. Blood samples, collected prior to anti-TNF exposure, were analyzed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the presence and quantity of OSM. Clinical remission was assessed at 1-year post anti-TNF exposure in addition to the occurrence of surgery, hospitalization, corticosteroid use, and adverse drug events. Lastly the threshold OSM plasma concentration associated with anti-TNF non-response was assessed by receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Patients with IBD (CD, n = 82; UC, n = 40) were assessed. In both UC and CD, mean pre-treatment OSM concentrations were significantly lower in those who achieved clinical remission at 1-year (p < 0.0001). A threshold plasma OSM concentration of 168.7 pg/ml and 233.6 pg/ml respectively separated those who achieved clinical remission at 1-year on an anti-TNF from those who did not in CD and UC respectively (CD: area under the receiver operator characteristic curve, AUROC = 0.880, 95% CI 0.79-0.96; UC: AUROC = 0.938, 95% CI 0.87-1.00). High OSM concentrations were associated with anti-TNF discontinuation and use of rescue steroids in CD and UC. High pre-treatment OSM concentrations identify IBD patients at-risk of anti-TNF non-response at 1-year as well as other deleterious clinical outcomes.

The Bowel CLEANsing National Initiative: High-Volume Split-Dose Vs Low-Volume Split-Dose Polyethylene Glycol Preparations: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare high-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) with low-volume PEG with bisacodyl split-dosing regimens. METHODS: Adult outpatients in 10 Canadian tertiary hospitals were randomized, stratified by morning or afternoon colonoscopy, to high-volume split-dose PEG (2 L + 2 L) (High-SD) or low volume (1 L + 1 L) + bisacodyl (15 mg) PEG (Low-SD), with a second randomization to liquid or low-residue diets. The primary end point, using noninferiority hypothesis testing, was adequate bowel cleansing (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale total score of ≥6, with each of 3 colonic segments subscores ≥2). Secondary objectives were willingness to repeat the preparation, withdrawal time, cecal intubation, and polyp detection rates. RESULTS: Over 29 months, 2314 subjects were randomized to High-SD (N = 1157) or Low-SD (N = 1157) (mean age, 56.2 ± 13.4 y; 52.1% women). Colonoscopy indications were 38.2% diagnostic, 36.8% screening, and 25.0% surveillance, with no between-group imbalances in patient characteristics. Low-SD satisfied noninferiority criteria vs High-SD for adequate bowel cleanliness with only marginally inferior results (90.1% vs 88.1%; P = .02; difference, 2.0%; 95% CI [0.0%; 4.5%]). High-SD was associated with lower willingness to repeat (66.9% vs 91.9%; P < .01), was less well tolerated (7.3 ± 2.3 vs 8.1 ± 1.9; P < .01), causing more symptoms. No differences in procedural outcomes were noted except for more frequent cecal intubation rates after High-SD (97.4% vs 95.6%; P = .02). Among the High-SD group, adequate bowel preparation was greater after a clear liquid diet (93.6% vs 87.9%; P < .01), a finding not seen in the Low-SD group. CONCLUSIONS: Low-SD is noninferior to High-SD in providing adequate bowel preparation. Low-SD results in fewer symptoms, with greater willingness to repeat and tolerability. The overall impact of diet was modest.The study was approved by the research ethic boards from all sites and was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02547571).

A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Two Bowel Cleansing Regimens for Colonoscopy After Failed Bowel Preparation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Failed bowel preparation for colonoscopy occurs commonly, but the optimal regimen for the subsequent attempt is unknown. High-volume preparations often are used but are not well studied. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of 2 regimens for use after failed bowel preparation. METHODS: A multicenter, endoscopist-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted in patients who previously failed bowel preparation despite adequate compliance. Patients were randomized to 1 of 2 split polyethylene glycol (PEG) regimens, preceded by 15 mg bisacodyl: PEG 2 L the evening before and 2 L the day of colonoscopy (PEG 2+2L+bisacodyl), or 4 L and 2 L (PEG 4+2L+bisacodyl). All patients followed a low-fiber diet on both the third and second day before the procedure, followed by a clear fluid diet the day before and the morning of the colonoscopy. The primary outcome was adequate bowel preparation, defined as a Boston Bowel Preparation Scale total score of 6 or higher, with all segment scores of 2 or higher. Secondary outcomes included adenoma detection rate, advanced adenoma detection rate, sessile serrated lesion detection, cecal intubation rate, tolerability, and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 196 subjects were randomized at 4 academic centers in Canada (mean age, 60.7 y; SD, 11.4 y; 44.9% were women). There were no significant differences between the PEG 2+2L+bisacodyl and the PEG 4+2L+bisacodyl groups in achieving adequate bowel preparation (91.2% vs 87.6%; P = .44). There were no significant differences with regard to mean adenoma detection rate (37.4% vs 31.5%; P = .41), advanced adenoma detection rate (18.7% vs 11.2%; P = .16), sessile serrated lesion detection (8.8% vs 5.6%; P = .41), and cecal intubation rate (96.7% vs 92.1%; P = .19). The 2 regimens were similarly well tolerated, but PEG 2+2L+bisacodyl was associated with a higher willingness to repeat the bowel preparation (91.2% vs 66.2%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Split-dose 4 L-PEG with 15 mg bisacodyl, along with dietary restrictions, has similar efficacy as a higher-volume preparation, and should be considered for patients who previously failed bowel preparation (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02976805).

Incidence of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis among asymptomatic cirrhosis patients undergoing outpatient paracentesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a common complication of decompensated cirrhosis with high morbidity and mortality rate. There is a paucity of evidence regarding the incidence of SBP in asymptomatic liver cirrhosis patients undergoing routine out-patient large-volume paracentesis (LVP). The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the incidence of SBP among asymptomatic decompensated cirrhosis patients undergoing routine outpatient LVP. METHODS: A systematic search of Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL electronic databases was performed in January 2021, along with a manual search of reference lists of retrieved articles. Data were extracted to determine the incidence of SBP [polymorphonuclear cells (PMNs) greater than 250 PMNs/mm3 with or without positive culture] and the incidence of all positive paracentesis (SBP or bacterascites-positive ascitic culture but no elevation in PMNs). RESULTS: A total of 504 studies were retrieved with 16 studies being included in the review. A total of 1532 patients were included with a total of 4016 paracentesis performed. The incidence of a positive paracentesis (SBP and/or bacterascitis) was 4% [95% confidence interval (CI), 3-6%]. However, the incidence of definite SBP was 2% (95% CI, 1-3%). CONCLUSION: The incidence of SBP in asymptomatic outpatients with decompensated cirrhosis requiring LVP is low. The benefit of routine analysis of all paracentesis samples in this population is questionable. Further studies are required to determine the cost-effectiveness of routine analysis and to determine if certain subgroups are at higher risk of SBP that require routine analysis.

Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Liver Transplantation: Validation of a Pathologic Risk Score on Explanted Livers to Predict Recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after liver transplantation is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. To date, there is no widely accepted pathologic assessment tool to predict HCC recurrence. In 2007, we developed a pathologic risk score that stratified patients into low, intermediate, or high risk for recurrence based on explant pathology. The aim of this study was to externally validate this risk score. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 124 patients over a 10-year period who underwent liver transplantation for HCC. Using explanted pathology reports, each patient was stratified according to the pathologic risk score and followed over time for HCC recurrence. RESULTS: Recurrence occurred in 15 patients (12%) after a mean follow-up of 25 months. Using the pathologic risk score, 10 (8%), 21 (17%), and 93 (75%) patients were stratified into high, intermediate, and low risk of recurrence, respectively. Among these risk groups, recurrence occurred in 50%, 28.5%, and 4.3% (P < .01) of patients, respectively. Using the optimal cutoff value ≤3.5, our risk score had a sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 79% with an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.8. Those with lower risk scores had higher recurrence-free survival (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our pathologic risk score accurately risks stratified patients for HCC recurrence after liver transplant. It can be used to tailor surveillance strategies for those deemed to be at elevated risk for recurrence.

Reliability of the Endoscopic Ultrasound Ulcerative Colitis (EUS-UC) score for assessment of inflammation in patients with ulcerative colitis.

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) may be a useful modality for disease assessment and risk stratification in ulcerative colitis. We assessed the reliability of a newly developed EUS index of inflammation called the EUS-Ulcerative Colitis (EUS-UC) score. Patients and methods The EUS-UC score components include total wall thickness, hyperemia, and depth of inflammation (DOI). Three blinded expert endosonographers assessed EUS videos of 58 patients with UC in triplicate. Intra- and inter-rater reliability of the hyperemia and DOI component scores were estimated using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs). Total wall thickness reliability estimates could not be assessed in this study. The ICCs were compared to the original indices from which they were derived. Results For hyperemia, the inter-class ICC was "moderate" at 0.556 (95 % CI = 0.434-0.651) and the intra class ICC was "almost perfect" at 0.884 (95 % CI = 0.835-0.920). The newly defined hyperemia score performed better than the original index from which is was derived. The DOI inter-class ICC was "fair" at 0.335 (95 % CI = 0.201-0.464), and the intra-class ICC was "substantial" at 0.732 (95 % CI = 0.642-0.802). The DOI reliability estimates were similar to the original index from which it was derived. Conclusions The hyperemia component of the EUS-UC score performed significantly better than the original index from which it was derived, but the reliability of the DOI component was suboptimal. Intra-class correlation was excellent for both components. The EUS-UC score is a promising instrument for assessment of UC and further validation is required.

A randomized controlled trial of high volume simethicone to improve visualization during capsule endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: The optimal dose of simethicone before capsule endoscopy is unknown. Prior studies have reported inconsistent cleansing, with some showing improved visualization only in the proximal small intestine. We hypothesized a higher volume of simethicone may improve cleansing and diagnostic yield, especially in the distal small bowel. METHODS: A phase III randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing high volume (1125 mg simethicone in 750 ml water) versus standard volume (300 mg simethicone in 200 ml water) solutions, both at 1.5 mg/ml. The primary outcome was adequate bowel preparation, defined as a KOrea-CanaDA (KODA) score >2.25, overall and stratified by the proximal and distal half of the small bowel. Secondary outcomes included mean KODA score, diagnostic yield, completion rate, and adverse events. All analyses were intention-to-treat. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients were randomized (mean (SD) age 58.7 (15.7), 54% female) and the most common indication was obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (71.7%). Adequate cleansing was achieved in 39 (50%) patients in the high volume group and in 39 (48%) patients in the standard volume group (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.76-1.43, p = 0.82), with no differences observed in the proximal half (71% vs 64%, p = 0.40) or the distal half -of the small bowel (36% vs. 37%, p = 0.88). There was no differences in the mean (SD) KODA score (2.20 (0.41) vs. 2.18 (0.44), p = 0.73), diagnostic yields (53% vs. 56%, p = 0.71), or completion rates (both 95%). One adverse event, nausea, occurred in the control group. CONCLUSION: High volume simethicone does not improve visualization during capsule endoscopy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial: NCT02334631.