RESUMO
Diet is thought to contribute to the development of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and may act as a mediator of inflammation in patients with IBD. Patients commonly associate their diet with symptoms and inquire about dietary modifications to manage their IBD. Without clinical guidelines and well-established nutritional data, healthcare providers managing patients with IBD may find it difficult to provide recommendations. Strong evidence for enteral nutrition, particularly in the pediatric population, has been established in Crohn's disease (CD) as a therapeutic option. Enteral nutrition may also serve as an adjunct to an exclusion diet. Recent studies such as the randomized trial comparing the Specific Carbohydrate Diet to a Mediterranean Diet in CD patients provide additional insights in forming dietary plans. A low-fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAP) diet in quiescent IBD and an anti-inflammatory diet have also been explored as adjunctive therapies. In this review, we discuss the latest evidence for the role of diet in IBD both as a therapeutic modality and as an opportunity to provide patient-centered care.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with medically-refractory ulcerative colitis or advanced neoplasia are often offered an ileal-pouch-anal anastomosis to restore bowel continuity. However, up to 50% of patients can suffer from inflammatory conditions of the pouch, some of which require biological therapy to treat. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of each biological agent for the treatment of inflammatory conditions of the pouch. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in the major databases from inception through February 11, 2020, for studies assessing the efficacy of biologics in chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis (CARP) and Crohn's disease (CD) of the pouch. Both prospective and retrospective studies were included. The primary outcomes of interest were complete and partial responses were defined within each study. χ 2 test was used to compare variables. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Sixteen studies (N=247) evaluated the use of infliximab (IFX), showing complete response in 50.7% and partial response in 28.1% for CARP, and complete response in 66.7% and partial response in 20% for CD of the pouch. Seven studies (n=107) assessed the efficacy of adalimumab. For CARP, 33.3% of patients had a complete response, and 38.1% had a partial response, whereas for CD of the pouch, 47.7% experienced a complete response, and 24.6% had a partial response. Three studies (n=78) reported outcomes with the use of ustekinumab, showing 50% complete response and 3.8% partial response for CARP. For the CD of the pouch, 5.8% had a complete response and 78.8% had a partial response. Seven studies (n=151) reported the efficacy of vedolizumab, showing 28.4% complete response and 43.2% partial response in patients with CARP, whereas 63% of patients experienced partial response in CD of the pouch. IFX had higher rates of complete response in CARP compared with adalimumab ( P =0.04) and compared with vedolizumab ( P =0.005), but not compared with ustekinumab ( P =0.95). There were no new safety signals reported in any of the studies. CONCLUSIONS: Biologics are safe and efficacious in the treatment of chronic, refractory inflammatory conditions of the pouch. IFX seems to be more efficacious than adalimumab and vedolizumab for CARP. Further prospective, head-to-head evaluations are needed to compare biological therapies in the treatment of CARP and CD of the pouch.
