Safety of prolonged use of metoclopramide and domperidone as treatment for chronic gastrointestinal dysmotility disorders in patients with systemic sclerosis.

Background: Metoclopramide and domperidone are prokinetic agents commonly used to treat gastrointestinal dysmotility disorders. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and associated side effects of prolonged-use metoclopramide and domperidone as treatment for chronic gastrointestinal dysmotility disorders in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). Methods: A quantitative observational survey was conducted by interview questionnaire in rheumatology outpatients at a tertiary teaching hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The study included all patients aged 25-80 years diagnosed with SSc. All patients were on metoclopramide or domperidone for the treatment of chronic gastrointestinal dysmotility symptoms over at least 12 weeks. Results: Eighteen eligible patients were included. Most study participants were diagnosed with SSc complicated by interstitial lung disease (n = 13; 72.2 %). The most frequently reported side effect that occurred while taking prokinetic drugs was shortness of breath (n = 12; 66.7 %). None of the participants reported experiencing depression, galactorrhea, or syncope. CNS side effects were reported in 5.6 %. There were no differences in side effects based on the type and dosage of prokinetic drug used. Conclusions: Use of metoclopramide and domperidone for the treatment of chronic gastrointestinal dysmotility in SSc patients for 12 weeks or longer was not associated with any troublesome side effects. Further studies with more participants are needed to confirm our findings.

Cost-Consequence Analysis of Colon Cancer Screening among Patients with Long-Standing Ulcerative Colitis: 11 Years' Experience of Saudi Population.

Background: Clinical guidelines recommend that patients with long-standing ulcerative colitis (UC) should undergo periodic surveillance colonoscopy. However, the cost and clinical value of performing annual colonoscopy among high-risk patient populations is largely unknown in the Middle East. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the cost and consequence of annual colonoscopy among high-risk UC patients in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on UC patients who had UC for ≥ 8 years or had primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) at any time during their disease,and underwent colonoscopy surveillance between 2010 and 2021 at a university-affiliated tertiary care center. Patients who underwent annual screening were considered adherent, and those who did not were considered non-adherent. The dysplasia detection rate (%) and the costs were expressed in United States Dollars (USD). To generate the 95 % confidence intervals for annual cost and clinical consequence, nonparametric bias-corrected accelerated bootstrapping with 10,000 simulations were conducted. Results: Two-hundred and sixty-one UC patients met the inclusion criteria and were included. Most of the patients 54 % (141 patients), were non-adherent to annual screening, and the patients' mean age and duration of illness were 45 years and 15 years, respectively. The mean annual direct medical costs were USD 10,210.6 for patients who adhered to the annual screening program and USD 6,191.77 for those who did not adhere. The mean rates of dysplasia detection were 1.66 % and 7.09 % for patients who adhered and patients who did not adhere to annual colonoscopy, respectively. The difference in costs and rates of dysplasia detections between those who adhered to the annual screening and those who did not were USD 4,018.88 (95 % CI: 3097.46 - 6,798.06) and -5.43 % (95 % CI: -10.019 - -1.58730), respectively, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD 740.125 per 1 % reduction in the rates of dysplasia. According to the bootstrap cost effectiveness distributions, adherence to the annual screening for UC patients would result in higher cost and lower rates of dysplasia development with more than 99 % confidence level. Conclusion: Adherence to annual colonoscopy screening detects more dysplasia in UC patients but with an increased cost. Considering the low rate of progression to colorectal cancer among UC patients, the annual screening might not be cost effective.

The Long-Term Clinical Effectiveness of Ustekinumab in Antitumor Necrosis Factor-Experienced Crohn's Disease Patients.

Background Crohn's disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) of unknown etiology. Ustekinumab (UST), an interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23 antibody, has been approved in the recent years to treat IBD, both Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. This study clarifies the long-term effectiveness of ustekinumab (UST) in antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) refractory Crohn's disease in Middle Eastern patients. Methods A retrospective review study, including 30 refractory or medication-intolerant patients with Crohn's disease, was conducted at a tertiary care center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The patients were started on ustekinumab and followed up for at least 52 weeks. Follow-up was performed on weeks 12, 24, and 52. Data related to demographic and laboratory parameters, the dosing schedule of ustekinumab administration, and the Harvey-Bradshaw index (HBI) were collected. Clinical remission and response rates were assessed. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics version 28.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). A statistical significance threshold of p < 0.05 was adopted. Results The mean age of the study subjects was 34.2 ± 17.9 years (95% confidence interval (CI): 27.5-40.9), with a mean disease duration of 10.6 ± 4.9 years (95% CI: 8.8-12.5). Of our cohort, 56.7% failed two biologics during their disease course, and about 20% failed three different biologics. The percentage of patients who used thiopurines was 76.7%, while 6.7% used methotrexate. Concurrent immunomodulators were used by 58.6% of the patients. Corticosteroids were given to 13.3% of the patients. Intravenous induction of UST at 6 mg/kg was used for 90% of the patients, while only 10% used a 260 mg subcutaneous dose. At week 12, 73.3% of the patients had a clinical response, and 66.7% achieved clinical remission. Corticosteroid-free remission, clinical response, and clinical remission showed a decreasing percentage trend between weeks 12 and 24 compared to week 52 where a spike was observed in all aforementioned parameters. The clinical response rate at week 52 was 76.7%. The p-values from cross-tabulation were significant for clinical response and remission when comparing week 12 to weeks 24 and 52. Conclusion Ustekinumab presents a safe and effective treatment option in moderate to severe Crohn's disease patients with previous exposure to multiple biologics.

Rate and risk factors of postoperative endoscopic recurrence of moderate- to high-risk Crohn's disease patients - A real-world experience from a Middle Eastern cohort.

Background: Crohn's disease (CD) frequently recurs after intestinal resection. Azathioprine (AZA) and biological therapies have shown efficacy in preventing postoperative recurrence (POR). Data on POR from Middle Eastern populations is lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the rate of endoscopic POR in a cohort of CD patients who underwent ileocecal resection (ICR), and to assess the effectiveness of AZA and biological therapies in reducing the risk of disease recurrence. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study on 105 CD patients followed at our center, who underwent ileal resection and were at moderate to high risk for POR. Clinical and laboratory data were collected; the primary endpoint was post ICR endoscopic recurrence at 24 months defined by Rutgeerts' score of i2 or more despite treatment. Results: In total, 105 patients with Crohn's disease met our inclusion criteria; 76.2% were in remission and did not have endoscopic POR at 24 months. Further, 41.9% were on biological therapy, and 34.3% were mainly on AZA. Out of the 28.2% who had POR, approximately 15% were on biological therapies. Penetrating phenotype was the only predictive factor for decreasing POR (OR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.04-0.98, P = 0.04) as identified in multiple logistic regression analysis. Conclusions: The use of biological therapies post-surgery was not superior than AZA in reducing the endoscopic POR for mod- high risk CD patients. Only penetrating behavior of the CD was associated with significantly lower risk of endoscopic recurrence. This finding is worth further investigation in more robust study designs and among larger samples of patients.

KODA score: an updated and validated bowel preparation scale for patients undergoing small bowel capsule endoscopy.

Background and study aims A reliable outcome measure is needed for bowel preparation quality during capsule endoscopy. Currently, no scales are adequately validated. Our objective was to update an existing small bowel preparation score, create a standardized training module, then determine its inter-rater and intra-rater reliability. Patients and methods Modification to produce standardized scoring of an existing small bowel preparation score was performed followed by development of a training module and validation to create the new Korea-Canada (KODA) score. Twenty readers from a range of backgrounds, including capsule endoscopists, gastroenterology fellows, residents, medical students, and nurses rated bowel cleanliness in 25 capsule videos consisting of 1,233 images, in duplicate 4 weeks apart, after completing the training module. Sequential images selected in 5-minute intervals during small bowel transit were rated on a scale between 0-3 based on the amount of visualized mucosa and the degree of obstruction. Reliability was assessed using estimates of intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Results Intraclass correlation coefficients for inter-rater (ICC 0.81, 95 % CI 0.70-0.87) and intra-rater (ICC 0.92, 95 % CI 0.87-0.94) reliability were almost perfect among the 20 readers. Inter-rater reliability ranged between 0.72 (95 % CI 0.57-0.81) and 0.89 (95 % CI 0.79-0.93) for nurses and residents, respectively. Intra-rater reliability was greater than 0.90 for all groups except for nurses, which was still almost perfect (ICC 0.86, 95 % CI 0.79-0.90). Conclusions Almost perfect inter-rater and intra-rater reliability was observed for the KODA score. This simple score could be used for future clinical trials after completion of the training module.

COVID-19 and endoscopy services in intermediately affected countries: a position statement from the saudi gastroenterology association.

With the global pandemic due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), there has been a significant strain on healthcare facilities. The infectivity rate, as well as the rate of healthcare workers who have fallen ill to the disease, has raised concerns globally on the proper management of patients as well as the role of safe healthcare provision utilizing personal protective equipment (PPE). Furthermore, the limited supply of PPEs has mandated rationing their use to achieve maximum utility and preservation. Multiple gastroenterology associations have issued guidance and statements that would help healthcare providers in navigating these unprecedented and difficult times, and the Saudi Gastroenterology Association has provided this statement in an effort to bring the most up to date information for the management of endoscopy units in terms of resources, manpower planning, scheduling, as well as infection control policies and leadership.

Magnetic imaging-assisted colonoscopy vs conventional colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.

AIM: To compare magnetic imaging-assisted colonoscopy (MIC) with conventional colonoscopy (CC). METHODS: Magnetic imaging technology provides a computer-generated image of the shape and position of the colonoscope onto a monitor to give visual guidance to the endoscopist. It is designed to improve colonoscopy performance and tolerability for patients by enabling visualization of loop formation and endoscope position. Recently, a new version of MIC technology was developed for which there are limited data.To evaluate this latest generation of MIC among experienced rather than inexperienced or trainee endoscopists, a prospective randomized trial was performed using only gastroenterologists with therapeutic endoscopy training. Consecutive patients undergoing elective outpatient colonoscopy were randomized to MIC or CC, with patients blinded to their group assignment. Endoscopic procedural metrics and quantities of conscious sedation medications were recorded during the procedures. The procedure was classified as "usual" or "difficult" by the endoscopist at the conclusion of each case based on the need for adjunctive maneuvers to facilitate endoscope advancement. After more than one hour post-procedure, patients completed a 10 cm visual analogue pain scale to reflect the degree of discomfort experienced during their colonoscopy. The primary outcome was patient comfort expressed by the visual analogue pain score. Secondary outcomes consisted of endoscopic procedural metrics as well as a sedation score derived from standardized dose increments of the conscious sedation medications. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-three patients were randomized and underwent MIC or CC between September 2011 and October 2012. The groups were similar in terms of the indications for colonoscopy and patient characteristics. There were no differences in cecal intubation rates (100% vs 99%), insertion distance-to-cecum (82 cm vs 83 cm), time-to-cecum (6.5 min vs 7.2 min), or polyp detection rate (47% vs 52%) between the MIC and CC groups. The primary outcome of mean pain score (1.0 vs 0.9 out of 10, P = 0.41) did not differ between MIC and CC groups, nor did the mean sedation score (8.2 vs 8.5, P = 0.34). Within the subgroup of cases considered more challenging or difficult, time-to-cecum was significantly faster with MIC compared to CC, 10.1 min vs 13.4 min respectively (P = 0.01). Sensitivity analyses confirmed a similar pattern of overall findings when each endoscopist was considered separately, demonstrating that the mean results for the entire group were not unduly influenced by outlier results from any one endoscopist. CONCLUSION: Although the latest version of MIC resulted in faster times-to-cecum within a subgroup of more challenging cases, overall it was no better than CC in terms of patient comfort, sedation requirements and endoscopic procedural metrics, when performed in experienced hands.