Search

Abstract Chronic viral hepatitis infection affects an estimated 325 million people globally. People who initiate treatment after significant disease progression face increased risk of severe liver complications and death. Data are scarce on the characteristics and risk factors of people who present late to care in Spain and globally. Data were collected from January 2018 to December 2019 to report late presentation (LP) to specialist care at 11 large university hospitals in Spain to assess related risk factors using a multivariable logistic regression model. 2290 (CHB = 505, CHC = 1785) patients were analysed, with 581 (25.2%) presenting late. Hepatitis C patients more frequently reported LP compared to hepatitis B patients (28.1% vs 15.0%; p

Objective: We tested the hypothesis that an enhanced bowel preparation strategy (EBS) improves colonic cleansing in patients at high risk for inadequate bowel cleansing (HRI).Methods: This prospective randomized clinical trial included consecutive HRI patients referred for outpatient colonoscopy between February and October 2019. HRI was considered if patients scored >1.225 according to a previously validated bowel-cleansing predictive score. HRI patients were randomized (1:1) to a low-volume conventional bowel cleansing strategy (CBS) (1-day low residue diet (LRD) plus 2 L of polyethylene glycol (PEG) plus ascorbic acid) or to an EBS (3-day LRD plus 10 mg oral bisacodyl plus 4 L PEG). The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) was used to assess the quality of cleanliness. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses were performed. A sample size of 130 patients per group was estimated to reach a 15% difference in favor of EBP.Results: A total of 253 HRI patients were included (mean age 69.8 ± 9.5 years, 51.8% women). No statistically significant differences were found in the BBPS scale between the two groups in the ITT analysis (CBS 76.8% vs. EBS 79.7%, P = 0.58) or PP analysis (CBS 78% vs. EBS 84.3%, P = 0.21), risk difference 2.9% (95% CI−7.26 to 39.16) in the ITT analysis, or risk difference 6.3% (95% CI−3.48 to 16.08) in PP analysis. No differences in preparation tolerance, compliance, adverse effects, or colonoscopy findings were found.Conclusion: EBS is not superior to CBS in hard-to-prepare patients. (EUDRACT: 2017-000787-15, NCT03830489).Clinical Trial Registration:www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03830489.

Background and Objectives: Proper bowel preparation is of paramount importance for enhancing adenoma detection rates and reducing postcolonoscopic colorectal cancer risk. Despite recommendations from gastroenterology societies regarding the optimal rates of successful bowel preparation, these guidelines are frequently unmet. Various approaches have been employed to enhance the rates of successful bowel preparation, yet the quality of cleansing remains suboptimal. Intensive bowel preparation techniques, supplementary administration of bowel solutions, and educational interventions aimed at improving patient adherence to instructions have been commonly utilized, particularly among patients at a high risk of inadequate bowel preparation. Expedited strategies conducted on the same day as the procedure have also been endorsed by scientific organizations. More recently, the utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged for the preprocedural detection of inadequate bowel preparation, holding the potential to guide the preparation process immediately preceding colonoscopy. This manuscript comprehensively reviews the current strategies employed to optimize bowel cleansing, with a specific focus on patients with elevated risks for inadequate bowel preparation. Additionally, the prospective role of AI in this context is thoroughly examined. Conclusions: While a majority of outpatients may achieve cleanliness with standard cleansing protocols, dealing with hard-to-prepare patients remains a challenge. Rescue strategies based on AI are promising, but such evidence remains limited. To ensure proper bowel cleansing, a combination of strategies should be performed.

BackgroundDuring the coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) pandemic, gastroenterology guidelines recommended the suspension or reduction of non-urgent endoscopy. We aimed to assess the appropriateness and safety of endoscopic activity during the pandemic first wave lockdown using European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) recommendations.MethodsWe identified scheduled patients from the onset of the lockdown in Spain since March 16, 2020) to April 14, 2020. Daily hospital COVID-19-related burden was also registered. A similar cohort from a period immediately before the lockdown was studied (pre-lockdown cohort) to compare appropriateness.Results454 endoscopy procedures were performed during the studied period, comprising a 49.7% reduction compared to the pre-lockdown cohort (n = 913). There was a significant increase in ESGE high-priority indications (62.1% vs. 45.6%, pConclusionA prioritized endoscopic activity is not associated with higher contagion after adopting protective measures. In addition, a triage of procedures that follow the ESGE criteria increases the rate of relevant endoscopic findings. These considerations may reduce the impact of the delays of diagnosis after the pandemic.

AimWe describe the effectiveness and safety of the interferon-free regimen ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir plus dasabuvir with or without ribavirin (OBV/PTV/r ± DSV ± RBV) in a nationwide representative sample of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) monoinfected and human immunodeficiency virus-1/hepatitis C virus (HIV/HCV) coinfected population in Spain.Material and methodsData were collected from patients infected with HCV genotypes 1 or 4, with or without HIV-1 coinfection, treated with OBV/PTV/r ± DSV ± RBV at 61 Spanish sites within the initial implementation year of the first government-driven "National HCV plan." Effectiveness was assessed by sustained virologic response at post-treatment week 12 (SVR12) and compared between monoinfected and coinfected patients using a non-inferiority margin of 5% and a 90% confidence interval (CI). Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics or patients and adverse events (AEs) were also recorded.ResultsOverall, 2,408 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis: 386 (16%) were patients with HIV/HCV. Patient selection reflected the real distribution of patients treated in each participating region in Spain. From the total population, 96.6% (95% CI, 95.8-97.3%) achieved SVR12. Noninferiority of SVR12 in coinfected patients was met, with a difference between monoinfected and coinfected patients of -2.2% (90% CI, -4.5% - 0.2%). Only genotype 4 was associated with non-response to OBV/PTV/r ± DSV ± RBV treatment (pConclusionsOur results confirm that OBV/PTV/r ± DSV ± RBV is effective and generally well tolerated in a representative sample of the HCV monoinfected and HCV/HIV coinfected population in Spain within the experience of a national strategic plan to tackle HCV.

Background and rational. Telaprevir-based therapy (TBT) has been extensively evaluated in clinical trials. So we designed a study to compare the efficacy and safety of TBT between patients with moderate fibrosis and those suffering from advanced fibrosis in clinical practice. A multicenter observational and ambispective study was conducted. It included 582 patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1, 214 with fibrosis F2, and 368 with F3/F4 (F3: 148; F4: 220).Results. The mean patient age was 55 years, 67% male. Type of prior response was 22% naïve, 57% relapsers, and 21% partial/null responders, 69% had high viral load (> 800,000 IU/mL). HCV genotypes were 1a (19%), 1b (69%), and 1 (12%), respectively. Sixty-five percent were non-CC IL28B genotype. Week-12 sustained virologic response (SVR12) was significantly higher among F2-naïve patients (78%) compared with F3/F4-naïve patients (60%; p = 0.039) and among F2 non-responders (67%) compared with F3/F4 non-responders (42%; p = 0.014). SVR12 among relapsers was remarkably high in both groups (F2:89% vs. F3/F4:78%). Severe anemia and thrombocytopenia were more frequent among patients with F3/F4 than those with F2 (p < 0.01). Overall, 132 patients (22%) discontinued treatment: 58 due to adverse effects, 42 due to the stopping-rule, and 32 due to breakthrough. Premature discontinuation was more frequent among patients with F3/F4 (p = 0.028), especially due to breakthrough (p < 0.001). Conclusions. This multicenter study demonstrates high efficacy and an acceptable safety profile with regard to TBT in F2-patients in clinical practice.

First-degree relatives (FDR) of patients with colorectal cancer have a higher risk of developing colorectal cancer than the general population. For this reason, screening guidelines recommend colonoscopy every 5 or 10 y, starting at the age of 40, depending on whether colorectal cancer in the index-case is diagnosed at

INTRODUCTION:Metabolic syndrome induces endothelial dysfunction, a surrogate marker of cardiovascular disease. In parallel, metabolic syndrome is frequently associated with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), which may progress to cirrhosis. The aim of the present study was to evaluate intrahepatic endothelial dysfunction related to cyclooxygenase end products and oxidative stress as possible mechanisms involved in the pathophysiology of NAFLD. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Sprague-Dawley rats were fed standard diet (control-diet, CD) or high-fat-diet (HFD) for 6 weeks. Metabolic syndrome was assessed by recording arterial pressure, lipids, glycemia and rat body weight. Splanchnic hemodynamics were measured, and endothelial dysfunction was evaluated using concentration-effect curves to acetylcholine. Response was assessed with either vehicle, L-NG-Nitroarginine (L-NNA), indomethacin, tempol, or a thromboxane receptor antagonist, SQ 29548. We quantified inflammation, fibrosis, oxidative stress, nitric oxide (NO) bioavailability and thromboxane B2 levels. RESULTS:HFD rats exhibited metabolic syndrome together with the presence of NAFLD. Compared to control-diet livers, HFD livers showed increased hepatic vascular resistance unrelated to inflammation or fibrosis, but with decreased NO activity and increased oxidative stress. Endothelial dysfunction was observed in HFD livers compared with CD rats and improved after cyclooxygenase inhibition or tempol pre-incubation. However, pre-incubation with SQ 29548 did not modify acetylcholine response. CONCLUSIONS:Our study provides evidence that endothelial dysfunction at an early stage of NAFLD is associated with reduced NO bioavailability together with increased cyclooxygenase end products and oxidative stress, which suggests that both pathways are involved in the pathophysiology and may be worth exploring as therapeutic targets to prevent progression of the disease.

UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND #ENTITYSTARTX00026; AIMS: Individuals at risk of (H1N1) influenza A infection are recommended to receive vaccination. Chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients receiving treatment might be at a higher risk of respiratory bacterial infections after influenza infection. However, there are no observational studies evaluating the immunogenicity, tolerance and acceptance of 2009 influenza A vaccine in CHC patients. METHODS: We evaluated the immunogenicity of influenza A vaccine (Pandemrix®) by using the hemagglutination inhibition (HI) titers method in a well defined cohort of CHC patients receiving or not receiving pegylated-interferon and ribavirin, and compared it with healthy subjects (controls). A group of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) under immunosuppression, thought to have a lower immune response to seasonal influenza vaccine, were also included as a negative control group. In addition, tolerance to injection site reactions and acceptance was assessed by a validated questionnaire (Vaccinees' perception of injection-VAPI-questionnaire). RESULTS: Of 114 subjects invited to participate, 68% accepted and, after exclusions, 72 were included. Post-vaccination geometric mean titers and seroprotection/seroconversion rates were optimal in CHC patients with ongoing treatment (n = 15; 232, CI95% 46-1166; 93%; 93%), without treatment (n = 10; 226, CI95% 69-743: 100%; 100%) and controls (n = 15;168, CI95% 42-680; 93%; 86%) with no differences between groups (P = 0.8). In contrast, IBD patients had a significantly lower immunogenic response (n = 27; 60, CI95% 42-680;66%;66%; P = 0.006). All the groups showed a satisfactory tolerance although CHC patients with ongoing treatment showed more local discomfort after vaccine injection. CONCLUSION: There appeared to be no differences between CHC patients and healthy controls in serological response and acceptance of (H1N1) influenza vaccination.