Scientific corner

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for inflammatory bowel disease

Katsuyoshi Matsuoka 1Taku Kobayashi 1Fumiaki Ueno 2 3Toshiyuki Matsui 1Fumihito Hirai 1Nagamu Inoue 1Jun Kato 1Kenji Kobayashi 1Kiyonori Kobayashi 1Kazutaka Koganei 1Reiko Kunisaki 1Satoshi Motoya 1Masakazu Nagahori 1Hiroshi Nakase 1Fumio Omata 1Masayuki Saruta 1Toshiaki Watanabe 1Toshiaki Tanaka 1Takanori Kanai 1Yoshinori Noguchi 1Ken-Ichi Takahashi 1Kenji Watanabe 1Toshifumi Hibi 1Yasuo Suzuki 1Mamoru Watanabe 1Kentaro Sugano 1Tooru Shimosegawa 1 , J Gastroenterol. 2018 Mar;53(3):305-353.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic disorder involving mainly the intestinal tract, but possibly other gastrointestinal and extraintestinal organs. Although etiology is still uncertain, recent knowledge in pathogenesis has accumulated, and novel diagnostic and therapeutic modalities have become available for clinical use. Therefore, the previous guidelines were urged to be updated. In 2016, the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology revised the previous versions of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD) in Japanese. A total of 59 clinical questions for 9 categories (1. clinical features of IBD; 2. diagnosis; 3. general consideration in treatment; 4. therapeutic interventions for IBD; 5. treatment of UC; 6. treatment of CD; 7. extraintestinal complications; 8. cancer surveillance; 9. IBD in special situation) were selected, and a literature search was performed for the clinical questions with use of the MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Igaku Chuo Zasshi databases. The guidelines were developed with the basic concept of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made using Delphi rounds. This English version was produced and edited based on the existing updated guidelines in Japanese.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29429045/

Scientific corner

The efficacy of intensive granulocyte and monocyte adsorption apheresis in a patient with Crohn’s disease complicated by extensive subcutaneous aseptic neutrophilic abscesses.

Shingo Kato 1Eriko HosomiFumi AmanoTaisuke KobayashiKazuhito KaniRyuichi YamamotoTomonari OgawaAkihiko MatsudaYoshiki SatoSeiichi IzakiTetsuya MitaraiKoji Yakabi, J Crohns Colitis. 2012 Aug;6(7):787-91.

Background and aims: Subcutaneous aseptic abscess is one phenotype of neutrophilic dermatitis. We were interested to see if a case of steroid refractory Crohn’s disease (CD) complicated by subcutaneous aseptic neutrophilic abscesses responds to intensive granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis (GMA). Methods: The patient was a 21-year-old male with worsening severe CD while on oral prednisolone (30 mg/day). His symptoms included fever, bloody diarrhoea and multiple painful subcutaneous nodules throughout his body. Skin biopsy showed chronic panniculitis with neutrophilic infiltrates. Further, colonoscopy showed oedematous sigmoid colon, while colonic biopsy showed non-caseous granuloma. Because biologics were feared to increase the risk of bacteraemia as the result of germ culture on his pus was not known at the time, we decided to treat this case with GMA. Five GMA sessions with the Adacolumn over 5 consecutive days (daily GMA) were initiated. Results: On admission, his CD activity index (CDAI) was 355, C-reactive protein (CRP) 11.2 mg/dL. After 5 GMA sessions, CDAI decreased to 170, and CRP fell to 5.0 mg/dL, with no fever. GMA was restarted at 2 sessions/week (total 10 sessions). The patient’s CDAI fell to <150, and the skin lesions re-epithelialized. Conclusions: In this CD case complicated by subcutaneous aseptic neutrophilic abscesses, GMA appeared to be effective. Our impression is that when biopsy reveals neutrophil infiltrate is a major feature of the lesions, GMA should be considered. As GMA appears to have no safety concerns, a frequent GMA protocol, like daily followed by 2 to 3 times/week should be preferred over the routine weekly GMA.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22386738/

Scientific corner

The Asia-Pacific consensus on ulcerative colitis

Choon Jin Ooi 1Kwong Ming FockGovind K MakhariaKhean Lee GohKhoon Lin LingIda HilmiWee Chian LimThia KelvinPeter R GibsonRichard B GearryQin OuyangJose SollanoSathaporn ManatsathitRungsun RerknimitrShu-Chen WeiWai Keung LeungH Janaka de SilvaRupert Wl LeongAsia Pacific Association of Gastroenterology Working Group on Inflammatory Bowel Disease

J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010 Mar;25(3):453-68. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2010.06241.x.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is increasing in many parts of the Asia-Pacific region. There is a need to improve the awareness of IBD and develop diagnostic and management recommendations relevant to the region. This evidence-based consensus focuses on the definition, epidemiology and management of ulcerative colitis (UC) in Asia. A multi-disciplinary group developed the consensus statements, reviewed the relevant literature, and voted on them anonymously using the Delphi method. The finalized statements were reviewed to determine the level of consensus, evidence quality and strength of recommendation. Infectious colitis must be excluded prior to diagnosing UC. Typical histology and macroscopic extent of the disease seen in the West is found in the Asia-Pacific region. Ulcerative colitis is increasing in many parts of Asia with gender distribution and age of diagnosis similar to the West. Extra-intestinal manifestations including primary sclerosing cholangitis are rarer than in the West. Clinical stratification of disease severity guides management. In Japan, leukocytapheresis is a treatment option. Access to biologic agents remains limited due to high cost and concern over opportunistic infections. The high endemic rates of hepatitis B virus infection require stringent screening before initiating immune-suppressive agents. Vaccination and prophylactic therapies should be initiated on a case-by-case basis and in accordance with local practice. Colorectal cancer complicates chronic colitis. A recent increase in UC is reported in the Asia-Pacific region. These consensus statements aim to improve the recognition of UC and assist clinicians in its management with particular relevance to the region.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20370724/

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1440-1746.2010.06241.x

Scientific corner

Leukocytapheresis in a girl with severe ulcerative colitis refractory to corticosteroids, infliximab, and cyclosporine A

Katalin DittrichMarkus RichterWolfgang RascherHenrik Köhler Inflamm Bowel Dis 2008 Oct;14(10):1466-7. doi: 10.1002/ibd.20464.

Although medical therapy remains the first-line treatment for UC, colectomy may be required for patients with severe medically refractory disease. Leukocytapheresis (LCAP) has been reported as a new line of therapy in
patients with UC. Only 2 pediatric case series, not including patients on immunosuppressive therapy or biologicals, treated with granulocytapheresis have been reported. The patient reported by us is the youngest to the best of our knowledge in which this LCAP technique was used . She had severe colitis refractory to corticosteroids, infliximab and yclosporine A. We were able to avoid colectomy and the procedure was well tolerated.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18421764/

Scientific corner

Predictors of a response to cyclosporine or leukocyte removal therapy in patients with refractory ulcerative colitis

TAKAFUMI ANDO, OSAMU WATANABE, RYUICHI FURUTA, OSAMU MAEDA, YUJI NISHIO,
TSUYOSHI NISHIWAKI, KENJI INA, KAZUO KUSUGAMI AND HIDEMI GOTO Digestive Endoscopy (2005) 17, 153–158

Introduction: Despite decades of clinical experience in optimizing the induction and maintenance of remission in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), some patients remain refractory to conventional medical treatment while, in others, the effectiveness of drugs is limited by side-effects. We investigated factors predictive of the efficacy of cyclosporine and leukocyte removal therapy in patients with intractable UC. Methods: Forty-five patients with moderate to severe UC who were refractory to corticosteroid therapy were enrolled. Twenty-six patients were treated with cyclosporine and 19 by leukocyte removal therapy. Disease activity index (DAI) score assessment, and colonoscopic and histological examinations were done before and at 10, 20 and 40 days after the initiation of treatment. A clinical response to treatment was defined as a decrease in DAI score of 3 points or more at 40 days. Results: Responder ratio did not significantly differ between the cyclosporine (65.6%) and leukocyte removal therapy (63.2%) groups. Factors predictive of a response to cyclosporine therapy were fever (≥ 38.0∞C), anemia and large mucosal ulceration. In contrast, mucosal bleeding and poor extensibility of the intestinal lumen were predictive of a poor response to cyclosporine. No significant differences in any clinical or endoscopic parameter predictive of a response to leukocyte removal therapy were identified. Conclusions: Intravenous cyclosporine may be effective in patients who have severe steroid-refractory UC, and leukocyte removal therapy may be useful in patients with moderate active UC predicted to be refractive to cyclosporine.

Contact UsFor more information

Contact Us