GastroHep最新文献

Background. Vedolizumab is a gut-selective monoclonal anti-α₄β₇-integrin antibody approved for the treatment of adults with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease (CD). Aim. To conduct a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of published real-world studies examining mucosal healing (MH) rates in patients with CD treated with vedolizumab in routine clinical practice. Methods. MEDLINE-, Cochrane-, and EMBASE-indexed publications from January 2014 to January 2020 and 2018-2019 conference abstracts were searched for real-world studies reporting MH-related outcomes in vedolizumab-treated adults with CD. A meta-analysis was conducted in R to generate pooled estimates of MH. The primary analysis included studies reporting point estimates of MH/endoscopic remission as absence of ulcers/erosions and/or Simple Endoscopic Score for CD (SES-CD) cut − points < 4, at 6 and 12 months. Results. The systematic literature review included 36 studies, predominantly of antitumour necrosis factor-experienced patients. MH and endoscopic remission were the most frequently reported endpoints. MH rates were 10.1%-46.0% at 6 months (ten studies) and 21.2%-62.5% at 12 months (eight studies). Fifteen studies defining MH as absence of ulcers/erosions and/or SES-CD cut − points < 4 were included for meta-analysis. Pooled MH rates for the primary analysis were 31.8% at 6 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 25.6-38.3; five studies, N = 223) and 33.4% at 12 months (95% CI: 25.9-41.4; three studies, N = 151). Conclusion. Approximately one-third of vedolizumab-treated patients with CD achieved MH at both 6 and 12 months in real-world clinical settings, despite utilisation in largely biologic-refractory patients. These findings confirm the effectiveness of vedolizumab for achieving MH in patients with CD.

Although acute pancreatitis is one of the most common conditions that physicians face in daily practice, different approaches are still being followed. Given that in 20–30% of cases, acute pancreatitis progresses to the severe form with single- or multiorgan failure and is often associated with admission to the intensive care unit, proper management is important. This article is aimed at emphasizing the importance of proper conservative treatment of acute pancreatitis and at focusing on intervention criteria in case of complications, analyzing additionally the step-up endoscopic and surgical approaches. The most common mistakes in conservative treatment include inadequate initial fluid resuscitation, abuse in the administration of antibiotics, insufficient analgesia, avoidance of oral feeding, and inappropriate use of imaging techniques. Moreover, the timing and indications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and cholecystectomy are crucial. Furthermore, in case of unsatisfying response to conservative treatment, which mainly happens during necrotic pancreatitis, early intervention is not indicated and a minimally invasive approach must be adopted firstly, 4 weeks after the onset of the disease, and before any surgical intervention. Each medical procedure has specific indications and must be used in the appropriate occasion. As a result, clinical doctors must be familiar both with the intervention criteria and the indications of each method. The proper management of acute pancreatitis is essential and life-saving. That is valid both for the conservative treatment and for the invasive approaches.

Background. Evidence regarding the use of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) in COVID-19 patients remains elusive. Aim. To examine the potential effects of PPI use on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients in a territory-wide cohort. Methods. A retrospective cohort study was performed using data from a territory-wide database in Hong Kong. Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from 23 January 2020 to 1 January 2021 were identified by virological results. The primary endpoint was a composite of intensive care unit admission, use of invasive mechanical ventilation, and/or death. PPI users were identified by PPI use within 12 months prior to their diagnosis of COVID-19. Results. We identified 8,675 COVID-19 patients (mean age 46 years, 49% male, 97.6% of all reported cases in Hong Kong), of which 579 (6.7%) patients had used PPI. PPI users were found to be older, more likely to have comorbidities, concomitant medications and unfavourable laboratory parameters than nonusers. Of the 8,675 COVID-19 patients, 500 (5.8%) developed the primary endpoint. After propensity score (PS) balancing for patients’ demographics, comorbidities, laboratory parameters, and use of medications, PPI use was not found to be associated with the development of primary endpoint in PS weighting (weighted hazard ratio (HR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82–1.46, P = 0.529), and PS matching analysis (weighted HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56–1.13, P = 0.198). Consistent nonassociation was observed after multivariable adjustment (adjusted HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67–1.06, P = 0.142), and in subgroups of current and past PPI users. Conclusion. PPI use is not found to be associated with adverse clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients. The result remains robust after PS weighting, PS matching, and multivariable adjustment.