Small bowel mucosal injury is reduced in healthy subjects treated with celecoxib compared with ibuprofen plus omeprazole, as assessed by video capsule endoscopy

Rebamipide has the potential to reduce the intensity of NSAID-induced small intestinal injury: a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial evaluated by capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND

A study reported that rebamipide was effective at reducing short-term nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced enteropathy. The purpose of this study was to re-evaluate the effect of the co-administration of rebamipide on small intestinal injuries induced by short-term NSAID treatment.

METHODS

Eighty healthy male volunteers were randomly assigned to two study groups: a control group (N = 40), which received NSAID (diclofenac sodium, 75 mg/day) and omeprazole (20 mg/day) treatment along with a placebo; and a rebamipide group, which received NSAID, omeprazole and rebamipide (300 mg/day). Small intestinal injuries (mucosal breaks plus denuded areas) were evaluated by capsule endoscopy before and after 14 days of treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 38 control subjects and 34 rebamipide subjects completed the treatment and were evaluated by capsule endoscopy. NSAID therapy increased the mean number of mucosal injuries per subject from a basal level of 0.1 ± 0.3 to 16 ± 71 and 4.2 ± 7.8 in the control and rebamipide groups, respectively, but the difference was not significant. The difference in the percentage of subjects with at least one mucosal injury post-treatment was also not significant (control 63%; rebamipide 47%). Limiting our analysis to subjects with mucosal injuries, rebamipide co-treatment had the tendency to reduce the mean number of mucosal injuries per subject from 25 in the control group to 8.9 in the rebamipide group (multiple comparisons test; p = 0.088, Mann-Whitney U test; p = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

Rebamipide co-therapy had the potential to reduce the intensity of small intestinal injury induced by 2-week administration of diclofenac.

Quantitative analysis of low-dose aspirin-associated small bowel injury using a capsule endoscopy scoring index

AIM

The major limitation of capsule endoscopy (CE) has been the lack of a standardized and validated severity scale for mucosal injury. The aim of the present study was to verify the usefulness of quantifying small bowel mucosal changes associated with giving low-dose aspirin (LDA) using a CE scoring index.

METHODS

The CE score for small bowel mucosal injury was investigated to evaluate the severity of mucosal injury. Healthy volunteers and patients suspected of having small bowel disease were recruited for this study. The short-term LDA group (V+S-LDA group) consisted of volunteers who took low-dose aspirin for 14days; this group was then compared with healthy volunteers who did not receive LDA treatment (V-Control group). The long-term LDA group (L-LDA group) consisted of patients with at least a 3-month history of daily LDA use; this group was compared with non-users of LDA (P-Control group).

RESULTS

The CE score was significantly higher in the V+S-LDA group than in the V-Control group. In the V-Control group, almost all the subjects were categorized as exhibiting a 'normal' change. 'Mild' changes were observed significantly more frequently in the V + S-LDA group than in the V-Control group. The CE score was significantly higher in the L-LDA group than in the P-Control group. 'Mild' or 'moderate or severe' changes were observed significantly more frequently in the L-LDA group than in the P-Control group.

CONCLUSION

The CE scoring system was useful for evaluating LDA-associated small bowel mucosal disease activity and for objectively scoring the small bowel inflammatory disease state.

Identifying and assessing benefit-risk in primary care--a family physician's perspective

For the family physician, NSAIDs, both traditional and cyclo-oxgenase-2 inhibitors, are a valuable contribution to managing arthritis and other rheumatological conditions in primary care. Yet, many of the patients seen by the family doctor have complex comorbidities and polypharmacy issues. This review looks at the main considerations for primary-care physicians while choosing an anti-inflammatory treatment for a hypothetical patient case study. In addition to looking at the evidence for gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risk, the concomitant use of aspirin with an NSAID is also examined. New evidence for interaction between selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors is reviewed and the interaction between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and NSAIDs is considered. Making careful judgements based on individual needs, medical history and comorbidities is recommended based on the evidence reviewed.

Undisclosed use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may underlie small-bowel injury observed by capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Findings from capsule endoscopies (CEs) of patients with enteropathy from nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may be indistinguishable from those with Crohn's disease, making medication history crucial to image interpretation. Undeclared NSAID use has been proposed to cause unexplained peptic ulcers; we investigated whether it is also an issue among patients referred for small-bowel CE.

METHODS

We collected demographic data, indications for CE, and medication history prospectively. A salicylate spot test and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry were performed for NSAID metabolites in urine samples of patients undergoing routine CE. Videos were analyzed by a gastroenterologist who was blinded to the urinalysis results.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients (52 women; mean age, 50 y) underwent CE for suspected small-bowel pathology. Urinalysis was positive in 13.6% of patients (salicylates, n = 3; ibuprofen, n = 6; and ibuprofen and diclofenac, n = 1) although only 1 of these patients declared use of an NSAID (aspirin). Although 2 patients had normal CE results, 80% had positive results, including the presence of erosions (n = 5), ulceration (n = 2), and ulcers with early stricturing (n = 1, diagnosed with Crohn's disease). A patient with small-bowel ulceration underwent surgery and was found to have NSAID-associated enteropathy, based on histologic analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Of patients who undergo CE, 13.6% took NSAIDs or aspirin, but most did not declare using these medications. Small-bowel inflammation was common in this cohort and could be mistaken for Crohn's disease. Patients should be questioned about use of over-the-counter medications, and routine urinalysis for NSAID metabolites may be helpful before interpretation of CE findings.

Wireless capsule endoscopy in enteropathy induced by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in pigs

AIM

The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy in nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced enteropathy in pigs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Indomethacin (400 mg/day) was administrated orally for 10 days to eight female pigs weighing 36.3+/-2.4 kg. Afterwards, capsule endoscopy was performed, using the EndoCapsule system (Olympus Optical Co., Tokyo, Japan). The following morning, pharmacological euthanasia and immediate autopsy were performed.

RESULTS

Small bowel injury compatible with NSAID-induced enteropathy was observed in 7/8 animals. The most common lesions were red spots and erosions. Ulcers and small intestinal bleeding were identified sporadically. Sensitivity and specificity of capsule endoscopy were 83.3% and 95.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that wireless capsule endoscopy is a highly accurate noninvasive method for evaluation of experimental NSAID-induced enteropathy.

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug-related injury to the gastrointestinal tract: clinical picture, pathogenesis, and prevention

Increasing life expectancy in developed countries has led to a growing prevalence of arthritic disorders, which has been accompanied by increasing prescriptions for nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). These are the most widely used agents for musculoskeletal and arthritic conditions. Although NSAIDs are effective, their use is associated with a broad spectrum of adverse reactions in the liver, kidney, cardiovascular system, skin, and gut. Gastrointestinal (GI) side effects are the most common. The dilemma for the physician prescribing NSAIDs is, therefore, to maintain the antiinflammatory and analgesic benefits, while reducing or preventing GI side effects. The challenge is to develop safer NSAIDs by shifting from a focus on GI toxicity to the increasingly more appreciated cardiovascular toxicity.

Evidence of intestinal inflammation in patients with cystic fibrosis

OBJECTIVES

Treatment with pancreatic enzymes fails to completely correct malabsorption and gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). The aim of the present study was to examine the small intestine of patients with CF without overt evidence of gastrointestinal disease using capsule endoscopy (CE).

METHODS

Patients with CF received the agile patency capsule and, depending on the result of that procedure, then underwent standard CE using the PillCam SB capsule (Given Imaging, Yokneam, Israel). A stool specimen was taken on the same day as the CE for determination of the calprotectin level.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients with CF ages 10 to 36 years were included; 29 had pancreatic insufficiency. One patient failed to excrete the patency capsule after 36 hours and was withdrawn from the study. Pulmonary function was mild to moderate with FEV1 68.5% +/- 16% predicted. Review of the CE videos showed that most of the patients had varying degrees of diffuse areas of inflammatory findings in the small bowel including edema, erythema, mucosal breaks, and frank ulcerations. There were no adverse events. Fecal calprotectin levels were markedly high in patients with pancreatic insufficiency, 258 microg/g (normal <50).

CONCLUSIONS

Small bowel mucosal pathology may be detected using CE in most of the patients with CF. The high fecal calprotectin levels found are suggestive of mucosal inflammation, which may correlate with the CE findings. Additional study is required to examine the possible relation of these mucosal lesions, which may be part of a newly identified enteropathy associated with CF, with persistent intestinal malabsorption in many of these patients.

Celecoxib versus omeprazole and diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis (CONDOR): a randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and non-selective NSAIDs plus a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) have similar upper gastrointestinal outcomes, but risk of clinical outcomes across the entire gastrointestinal tract might be lower with selective drugs than with non-selective drugs. We aimed to compare risk of gastrointestinal events associated with celecoxib versus diclofenac slow release plus omeprazole.

METHODS

We undertook a 6-month, double-blind, randomised trial in patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis at increased gastrointestinal risk at 196 centres in 32 countries or territories. Patients tested negative for Helicobacter pylori and were aged 60 years and older or 18 years and older with previous gastroduodenal ulceration. We used a computer-generated randomisation schedule to assign patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive celecoxib 200 mg twice a day or diclofenac slow release 75 mg twice a day plus omeprazole 20 mg once a day. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was a composite of clinically significant upper or lower gastrointestinal events adjudicated by an independent committee. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00141102.

FINDINGS

4484 patients were randomly allocated to treatment (2238 celecoxib; 2246 diclofenac plus omeprazole) and were included in intention-to-treat analyses. 20 (0.9%) patients receiving celecoxib and 81 (3.8%) receiving diclofenac plus omeprazole met criteria for the primary endpoint (hazard ratio 4.3, 95% CI 2.6-7.0; p<0.0001). 114 (6%) patients taking celecoxib versus 167 (8%) taking diclofenac plus omeprazole withdrew early because of gastrointestinal adverse events (p=0.0006).

INTERPRETATION

Risk of clinical outcomes throughout the gastrointestinal tract was lower in patients treated with a COX-2-selective NSAID than in those receiving a non-selective NSAID plus a PPI. These findings should encourage review of approaches to reduce risk of NSAID treatment.

FUNDING

Pfizer Inc.

Distribution of small intestinal mucosal injuries as a result of NSAID administration

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) induce small intestinal mucosal injuries. The concentrations of NSAIDs, bile acids and intestinal flora may differ in the proximal and distal parts of the small intestine. This study aimed to analyse types and distributions of NSAID-induced small intestinal injuries.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

In total 55 healthy male volunteers were examined using baseline capsule endoscopy (CE). Subjects then undertook a 14-day regimen of NSAID medication (diclofenac sodium, 75 mg day(-1)) with proton-pump inhibitors (omeprazole 20 mg day(-1)) as gastroprotection. After 14 days, subjects underwent post-treatment CE and were assessed for three types of small intestinal injuries: denuded areas, erosions and ulcers. The proximal and distal parts of the small intestine were arbitrarily classified according to CE transit time from the duodenal bulb.

RESULTS

Baseline CE revealed six mucosal lesions in 6 of 55 subjects (11%), consisting of three denuded areas and three erosions. Post-treatment CE identified 636 lesions in 32 of 53 subjects (60%); including 115 denuded areas in 16 subjects, 498 erosions in 22 subjects and 23 ulcers in 8 subjects. The distribution of small intestinal injuries differed according to type; denuded areas (90%: 103/115) were predominantly located in the proximal part, erosions throughout the small intestine and all ulcers in the distal part. The location of ulcers and denuded areas differed statistically (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of short-term NSAID medication on the small intestine differed according to intestinal site, with most denuded areas identified in the proximal part and all ulcers in the distal part.

A review of the gastrointestinal safety data--a gastroenterologist's perspective

Although NSAIDs have a well-established place for certain indications in the management of OA and RA, they are associated with significant gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. The risk of NSAID-related upper GI events, such as dyspepsia or peptic ulcer and complications such as perforation or bleeding, is well characterized. Non-selective NSAIDs increase the risk of peptic ulcer disease approximately 5-fold, and that of upper GI bleeding 4-fold, whereas selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX) inhibitors are associated with a significantly lower GI toxicity than non-selective agents. There is evidence that, while the incidence of NSAID-related upper GI complications has decreased in recent years, that of lower GI complications is increasing. Observational studies and analyses from studies, primarily designed to investigate upper GI events, suggest that lower GI complications are relatively common in NSAID users and that COX-2 selective inhibitors are associated with a lower risk of these events. Such events have been poorly characterized, but are associated with significant mortality; indeed, they may have even more serious consequences than the better characterized upper GI events. There is thus a strong case for evaluating the impact of such complications in prospective outcome studies. To facilitate such studies a new endpoint, Clinically Significant Upper or Lower GI Events, has been introduced that captures both upper and lower GI events.

A Review of Anti-Inflammatory Drug-Induced Gastrointestinal Injury: Focus on Prevention of Small Intestinal Injury

Capsule endoscopy and balloon endoscopy, advanced modalities that allow full investigation of the entire small intestine, have revealed that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can cause a variety of abnormalities in the small intestine. Recently, several reports show that traditional NSAIDs (tNSAIDs) and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) can induce small intestinal injuries. These reports have shown that the preventive effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) does not extend to the small intestine, suggesting that concomitant therapy may be required to prevent small intestinal side effects associated with tNSAID/ASA use. Recently, several randomized controlled trials used capsule endoscopy to evaluate the preventive effect of mucoprotective drugs against tNSAID/ASA-induced small intestinal injury. These studies show that misoprostol and rebamipide reduce the number and types of tNSAID-induced small intestinal mucosal injuries. However, those studies were limited to a small number of subjects and tested short-term tNSAID/ ASA treatment. Therefore, further extensive studies are clearly required to ascertain the beneficial effect of these drugs.

Randomized, double-blind, pilot study of geranylgeranylacetone versus placebo in patients taking low-dose enteric-coated aspirin. Low-dose aspirin-induced small bowel damage

OBJECTIVE

Low-dose enteric-coated aspirin is increasingly being used for prevention of cardiovascular disease. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether geranylgeranylacetone (GGA) could prevent aspirin-induced small bowel injury.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, pilot study of GGA versus placebo in subjects taking low-dose enteric-coated aspirin. Young healthy volunteers were enrolled and each received 100 mg of enteric-coated aspirin per day plus either GGA (150 mg/day) or matching placebo for 7 days. Video capsule endoscopy of the small bowel and the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) questionnaire were performed before and after the administration of aspirin.

RESULTS

Twenty volunteers were evaluated. There was no significant difference in the number of lesions in any category between those receiving or not receiving GGA. Large erosions or ulcers were observed in 12 (60%; 95% confidence interval 36%- 80%) aspirin users. Mucosal breaks were most frequently found in the latter half of the proximal small bowel.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term administration of low-dose enteric-coated aspirin was associated with visible small bowel damage in the majority of users. We could not prove that aspirin-induced small bowel mucosal injury was prevented by GGA.

NSAIDs and the gastrointestinal tract

NSAIDs incur significant gastrointestinal (GI) side effects. The complication risk increases with history of peptic ulcer or older age. Helicobacter pylori infection and cardioprotective aspirin have independent and additive risks in the presence of NSAID use. NSAID enteropathy is increasingly recognized. Cardiovascular and GI risk stratification and H. pylori infection testing should be done before initiating NSAIDs. An NSAID combined with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is comparable to cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors for gastroprotection, but for high-risk patients, COX-2 plus PPI should be considered. Aspirin and COX-2 inhibitors are associated with reduced colon adenoma risk, but higher dose and longer duration of treatment with aspirin appears effective. Hence, patients at high risk of colorectal cancer (with significant family or personal history of premalignant adenoma) must be identified, and cardiovascular and GI risk must be assessed before using these agents as chemopreventive drugs.

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and cyclooxygenase inhibition in the gastrointestinal tract: a trip from peptic ulcer to colon cancer

Aspirin was commercialized more than a 100 years ago. Today, this compound is still widely prescribed, and new mechanisms of action and indications are being tested. Inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 and COX-2 by aspirin or its related compounds, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), has been associated with both adverse and beneficial effects in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Inhibition of COX-1 has been linked to GI adverse effects. Adverse effects of NSAIDs and aspirin in the upper GI tract include esophagitis, peptic ulcer, peptic ulcer complications, and death. Effective preventive therapies are available that have been associated with a progressive decline in the rate of hospitalization due to upper GI complications. NSAIDs and aspirin can also damage the small bowel and the colon. NSAID enteropathy is frequent and in most cases subclinical (increased mucosal permeability, inflammation, erosion, ulcer). However, more serious clinical outcomes such as anemia, bleeding, perforation, obstruction, diverticulitis, and deaths have also been described. Prevention therapy of NSAID damage to the lower GI tract is not well defined. Inhibition of COX-2 by NSAIDs, coxibs, or aspirin seems to provide beneficial effects to the GI tract. Observational studies show that these compounds reduce the risk of both upper and lower GI cancers. Randomized controlled trials have shown that aspirin and coxibs reduce the recurrence rate of colonic polyps, and long-term cohort studies have shown that aspirin reduces the risk of colon cancer time and dose dependently. New studies will have to define the appropriate population that may benefit with these therapies.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and lower gastrointestinal complications

In addition to the upper GI tract, NSAIDs can damage the small bowel and the colon. NSAID enteropathy is frequent and may be present in more than 60% of patients taking these drugs long term. In most cases, damage is subclinical, including increased mucosal permeability, inflammation, erosions, ulceration, but other more serious clinical outcomes such as anemia, and overall bleeding, perforation, obstruction, diverticulitis and deaths have also been described. The magnitude of these serious outcomes from the lower GI tract is not well defined, but recent data suggest that they may be as frequent and severe as upper GI complications. Contrary to what happens in the upper GI tract, treatment and prevention of NSAID enteropathy is difficult, since the pathogenic mechanisms are different and not well understood. Among other options, misoprostol, antibiotics, and sulphasalazine have been proved to be effective in animal models, but they have not been properly tested in humans. Selective COX-2 inhibition is emerging as a potential alternative to tNSAIDs in the prevention of damage in the lower GI tract in rheumatologic patients. Preliminary studies in healthy volunteers have shown that these drugs are associated with no or less small bowel damage than tNSAIDs plus PPI, although their long-term effects in patients need to be properly tested. Post hoc analysis of previous outcome studies focused on complications of upper GI tract or cardiovascular events have shown contradictory results. Data from one ongoing trial comparing celecoxib versus diclofenac plus PPI and examining serious outcomes from the whole GI tract will probably provide new insights in this area.

Prevention of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced small-intestinal injury by prostaglandin: a pilot randomized controlled trial evaluated by capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND

There is no known preventive agent against nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) induced small-intestinal injury.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate by capsule endoscopy whether coadministration of prostaglandin (PG) can prevent small-intestinal damage induced by short-term NSAID treatment.

DESIGN

Single-blind, randomized, controlled trial.

SETTING

All procedures were performed at Nippon Medical School.

SUBJECTS

Thirty-four healthy male volunteers.

METHODS

All subjects were randomly assigned to 2 groups: an NSAID-control group, who underwent NSAID (diclofenac sodium, 25 mg 3 times daily) and omeprazole (20 mg once daily) treatment, and an NSAID-PG group, who received PG (misoprostol, 200 microg 3 times daily) in addition to the same NSAID-omeprazole treatment. Eligible subjects, 15 per group, underwent capsule endoscopy before and 14 days after treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The number of mucosal breaks at capsule endoscopy.

RESULTS

NSAID treatment significantly increased the mean (SD) number of mucosal breaks per subject, from a basal level of 0.1 +/- 0.3 up to 2.9 +/- 6.3 lesions in the NSAID-control group (P = .012). In contrast, there was no significant change in the mean number of mucosal breaks before and after PG cotreatment (P = 0.42). Thus, the mean number of posttreatment mucosal breaks per subject was significantly higher in the NSAID-control group than in the NSAID-PG group (P = .028). There was a significant increase in the percentage of subjects in the NSAID-control group, with at least 1 mucosal break after treatment (from 6.7% to 53.3%), whereas there was no change in the incidence of mucosal breaks in the NSAID-PG group, which remained at 13.3%. (P = .002).

LIMITATIONS

Single-center, open-label study.

CONCLUSIONS

PG cotherapy reduced the incidence of small-intestinal lesions induced by a 2-week administration of diclofenac sodium.

HSP70 confers protection against indomethacin-induced lesions of the small intestine

In line with improvements in diagnostic procedures to detect intestinal lesions, it has become clear that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as indomethacin induce lesions not only in the stomach but also in the small intestine. However, clinical protocols for the treatment of NSAID-induced lesions of the small intestine have not been established. It is known that heat shock proteins (HSPs), particularly HSP70, confer protection against various stressors, and more recently, the anti-inflammatory activity of HSP70 was revealed. In this study, we examined the effect of expression of HSP70 on indomethacin-induced lesions of the small intestine. The extent of indomethacin-induced lesions to the small intestine was reduced in transgenic mice expressing HSP70 compared with controls. Oral administration of indomethacin increased the expression of HSP70 in the small intestine. Administration of indomethacin also induced mucosal cell apoptosis and expression of proinflammatory cytokines in the small intestines of control mice, with both of these responses suppressed in the transgenic mice. Geranylgeranylacetone (GGA), a clinically used antiulcer drug, increased expression of HSP70 in the small intestine and suppressed indomethacin-induced lesions of the small intestines in wild-type mice. These results suggest that indomethacin-induced increase in HSP70 expression reduces the extent of lesions to the small intestine by suppressing mucosal cell apoptosis and inflammatory responses. The HSP-inducing activity of GGA seems to contribute to the protective effect of drug against the lesions. Based on these results, we propose that nontoxic HSP70-inducers, such as GGA, would be therapeutically beneficial for treating NSAID-induced lesions of the small intestine.

Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with high gastrointestinal risk: are we there yet?

Gastrointestinal complications from the use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are common and costly. Cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors cause fewer gastrointestinal events than nonselective NSAIDs but may still result in peptic ulcer complications in a significant proportion of high-risk patients. The risk can be further reduced by prescribing COX-2 inhibitors together with proton pump inhibitors. Small-bowel injury is also commonly seen in long-term users of COX-2 inhibitors. The potential cardiovascular side effects of most COX-2 inhibitors and NSAIDs pose great challenge to physicians. Further studies are required to optimize the treatment regimen in patients with high cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risk and to decide the best treatment options for patients with small- and large-bowel complications.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced small-bowel lesions identified by double-balloon endoscopy: endoscopic features of the lesions and endoscopic treatments for diaphragm disease

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) occasionally induce small-bowel injury. However, the clinical features have only been partially clarified. The aim of this study was to clarify the clinical features of the disease and evaluate the effectiveness of endoscopic balloon dilation therapy for diaphragm disease, using double-balloon endoscopy (DBE).

METHODS

This is a retrospective case study using our DBE database. Our inclusion criteria required patients to meet all the following criteria: (1) history of NSAID use; (2) endoscopic findings of erosion and/or ulcer and/or typical diaphragm-like strictures; (3) improvement in clinical findings (signs and symptoms) and/or endoscopic findings by cessation of NSAIDs, except for diaphragm disease; and (4) exclusion of other causes (e.g., malignant tumor, inflammatory bowel disease, and infectious disease). The clinical records of patients were investigated.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were included. Sixteen patients showed ulcerative lesions, and the remaining 2 patients showed diaphragm diseases. For localized lesions, 12 patients evidenced lesions in the ileum, 5 patients had lesions in the duodenum and/or jejunum, and 1 had lesions in both intestines. The ulcerative lesions were multiple with various morphologies that were located unrelated to mesenteric or antimesenteric sides. The endoscopic balloon dilations were performed safely, and all patients improved with regard to their symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Symptomatic NSAID-induced small-bowel injuries exhibit a variety of patterns of ulcerative lesions as observed in the ileum in many cases. The endoscopic balloon dilation appears to be a safe and effective treatment for diaphragm disease.

Myths and facts in the use of anti-inflammatory drugs

BACKGROUND

Because of the prominence of pain-related conditions and the growing complexities of clinical management we aimed to explore and attempt to dispel the several myths that surround these serious therapeutic issues.

AIMS

We aimed to provide a careful analysis of the evidence and draw factually based guidance for physicians who manage the broad range of patients with pain.

METHODS

Current myths were identified based on the authors' clinical, scientific, and academic experience. Each contributor addressed specific topics and made his own selection of primary references and systematic reviews by searching in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases (1990-2008) as well as in the proceedings of the major digestive and rheumatology meetings. The writing and references provided by each contributor were collectively analyzed and discussed by all authors during several meetings until the final manuscript was prepared and approved.

RESULTS

Seven major 'historical' myths that may perpetuate habits and beliefs in clinical practice were identified. Each of them was thoroughly examined and dispelled, drawing conclusions that should help guide physicians to better manage patients with pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain relief must be considered a human right, and patients with osteoarthritis pain should be treated appropriately with analgesic or/and anti-inflammatory drugs. The risk of gastrointestinal (GI) complications with traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (t-NSAIDs) is present from the first dose (with both short-term and long-term use), and strategies to prevent GI complications should be considered regardless of the duration of therapy. Compared with t-NSAIDs, coxib use is associated with a small but significant reduction of dyspepsia. While protecting the stomach, proton pump inhibitors do not prevent NSAID-induced intestinal damage. To this end, coxib therapy could be the preferred option, although further randomized studies are needed. A substantial number of patients who need NSAIDs are also taking low-dose aspirin for cardiovascular prophylaxis. From a GI perspective, the combination of aspirin plus a coxib provides a preferred option compared with aspirin plus a t-NSAID, for patients at high GI risk. As the incidence of renovascular adverse effects with t-NSAIDs and coxibs is similar, blood pressure should be monitored and managed appropriately in patients taking these drugs, although they should be avoided in those with severe congestive heart failure. Due to increased cardiovascular risk, which is dependent on the dose, duration of therapy, and base-line cardiovascular risk, both t-NSAIDs and coxibs should be used with caution in patients with underlying prothrombotic states and/or concomitant cardiovascular risk factors.

Small bowel polyps and tumours: endoscopic detection and treatment by double-balloon enteroscopy

BACKGROUND

Double-balloon enteroscopy has allowed us not only to inspect deeply the small bowel but also to carry out interventions for diseases of the small bowel.

AIM

To evaluate the utility of double-balloon enteroscopy for the diagnosis and therapy of these lesions.

METHODS

All patients undergoing double-balloon enteroscopy for evaluation of small bowel polyps and tumours during a 3.75-year period at a university referral hospital were studied. The types of polyps and tumours as well as endoscopic technique of removal, surgery and complications were documented.

RESULTS

The incidence of small bowel polyps and tumours in-patients undergoing DBE was 9.6%. A total of 40 double-balloon enteroscopy procedures were performed in 29 patients [13 female (44.8%), mean age 51 years, range 22-74]. The following lesions were found most frequently: adenomas in familial adenomatous polyposis syndrome, n = 8; hamartomas, n = 4 (Peutz-Jeghers and Cronkhite Canada syndromes), jejunal adenocarcinoma n = 5, neuroendocrine tumour n = 4 and others n = 6.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of small bowel tumours in those in-patients who were undergoing double-balloon enteroscopy was 10%. Double-balloon enteroscopy is useful for the diagnosis and treatment of small bowel polyps and tumours.

Role of coxibs in the strategies for gastrointestinal protection in patients requiring chronic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory therapy

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the most commonly prescribed drugs due to their high efficacy in the treatment of pain, fever, inflammation and rheumatic disorders. However, their use is associated with the occurrence of adverse effects at the level of digestive tract, ranging from dyspeptic symptoms, gastrointestinal erosions and peptic ulcers to more serious complications, such as overt bleeding or perforation. To overcome problems related to NSAID-induced digestive toxicity, different therapeutic strategies can presently be considered, including the co-administration of drugs endowed with protective activity on the upper gastrointestinal tract, such as the proton pump inhibitors, or the prescription of coxibs, which have been clinically developed as anti-inflammatory/analgesic drugs characterized by reduced damaging activity on gastrointestinal mucosa. The availability of different treatment options, to reduce the risk of NSAID-induced adverse digestive effects, has fostered intensive preclinical and clinical research aimed at addressing a number of unresolved issues and to establish rational criteria for an appropriate use of coxibs in the medical practice. Particular attention is being paid to the management of patients with high degrees of digestive risk, resulting by concomitant treatment with low-dose aspirin for anti-thrombotic prophylaxis or ongoing symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcers. The present review discusses the most relevant lines of evidence concerning the position of coxibs in the therapeutic strategies for gastrointestinal protection in patients who require NSAID therapy and hold different levels of risk of developing adverse effects at the level of digestive tract.

Lower gastrointestinal events in a double-blind trial of the cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitor etoricoxib and the traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug diclofenac

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) cause lower gastrointestinal (GI) clinical events such as bleeding. Cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitors decrease upper GI events, but no prospective trial has prespecified assessment of lower GI clinical events.

METHODS

Patients >or=50 years old with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis were randomly assigned to etoricoxib (60 or 90 mg qd) or diclofenac (150 mg qd). Lower GI clinical events, confirmed by a blinded adjudication committee, included perforation or obstruction requiring hospitalization or bleeding (gross or occult rectal bleeding without upper GI cause associated with hypotension, orthostatic changes in heart rate [>20 beats per minute] or blood pressure [>20 mmHg systolic or >10 mmHg diastolic], hemoglobin drop >or=2 g/dl, or transfusion; or observed active bleeding or stigmata of hemorrhage).

RESULTS

We enrolled 34,701 patients with mean duration of therapy of 18 months. Rates were 0.32 and 0.38 lower GI clinical events per 100 patient-years for etoricoxib and diclofenac (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-1.13). Bleeding was the most common event (rates of 0.19 and 0.23 per 100 patient-years, respectively). Multivariable analysis revealed significant risk factors to be prior lower GI event (HR = 4.06; 95% CI, 2.93-5.62) and age >or=65 years (HR = 1.98; 95% CI, 1.45-2.71).

CONCLUSIONS

A statistically significant decrease in lower GI clinical events was not seen with the COX-2 selective inhibitor etoricoxib versus the traditional NSAID diclofenac. The risk of a lower GI clinical event with NSAID use seems to be constant over time, and the major risk factors are a prior lower GI event and older age.

Capsule endoscopy: technique and indications

Since it was introduced in 2000, capsule endoscopy has become the gold standard for endoscopic examination of the small bowel in several clinical situations such as obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, suspicion of Crohn's disease, and surveillance of polyposis syndromes. In this technique a miniaturised endoscope, embedded in a swallowable capsule, is propelled through the gut by peristalsis and reaches the right colon in 5-8h. Images captured by the capsule are recorded on a hard drive in a belt worn by the patient. In addition to the extensive literature currently available on small bowel CE, new capsule devices are currently under evaluation for the examination of the colon with the purpose of screening for colorectal cancer, and of the oesophagus for screening for oesophageal varices and Barrett's oesophagus. These latter indications currently remain under evaluation. This review considers the technical aspects of capsule endoscopy and discusses the indications. Issues of safety and tolerance are also discussed.

Capsule endoscopy in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs-enteropathy and miscellaneous, rare intestinal diseases

Despite significant advances over the last decade, mucosal lesions of the small bowel are poorly detected by imaging studies such as CT scan, MRI-enteroclysis and contrast-enhanced abdominal ultrasound. Capsule endoscopy (CE) has dramatically changed the diagnostic approach to intestinal diseases. Moreover, the use of CE can be extended to include other conditions. However, it is difficult to assess the positive influence of CE on patient outcomes in conditions involving a small number of patients, or in critically ill and difficult to examine patients. CE has the advantage of diagnosing intestinal lesions and of directing the use of double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) in order to obtain biopsy specimens. Moreover, CE allows repeated assessment in chronic conditions, especially to detect relapse of an infectious disease.

[The safety of COX-2 inhibitors]

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the most commonly prescribed drugs worldwide, but they can cause serious gastrointestinal (GI) side effects. NSAIDs are capable of damaging the whole gastrointestinal tract. Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors (coxibs) have been developed with the aim of maintaining the anti-inflammatory benefits but reducing gastrotoxicity. There is a good evidence that these drugs effectively prevent gastroduodenal ulcers and ulcer complications. Little is known about the side effects of these agents in the small and large intestine. There is an increasing evidence that COX-2 is constitutively expressed in the gastrointestinal tract and is important for the maintenance of bowel integrity. There have also been growing concerns about the potential for coxibs to increase the frequency of adverse cardiovascular events. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent knowledge about the safety profile of selective COX-2 inhibitors.

Less small-bowel injury with lumiracoxib compared with naproxen plus omeprazole

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor lumiracoxib has been shown to reduce endoscopically detected ulcers and ulcer complications in the upper gastrointestinal tract compared with nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. We investigated whether lumiracoxib would reduce small-bowel injury compared with naproxen plus omeprazole.

METHODS

Healthy volunteers were randomized to receive lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily, naproxen 500 mg twice daily plus omeprazole 20 mg once daily, or placebo in a 16-day double-blind, parallel-group study. Small-bowel mucosal injury and inflammation were assessed by video capsule endoscopy, the lactulose:L-rhamnose permeability assessment, and the fecal calprotectin test.

RESULTS

Of 152 randomized subjects, 139 completed the study with valid video capsule endoscopies (lumiracoxib, n = 47; naproxen plus omeprazole, n = 45; placebo, n = 47). Compared with placebo, an increased number of subjects on naproxen plus omeprazole had small-bowel mucosal breaks (77.8% vs 40.4%, P < .001), with increased permeability (P = .023) and increased fecal calprotectin (increase, 96.8 vs 14.5 mg/kg for placebo; P < .001). With lumiracoxib, 27.7% of subjects had small-bowel mucosal breaks (P = .196 vs placebo; P < .001 vs naproxen), there was no increase in permeability (P = .157 vs placebo; P = .364 vs naproxen), and no increase in fecal calprotectin (-5.7 mg/kg; P = .377 vs placebo; P < .001 vs naproxen).

CONCLUSIONS

As assessed by 3 different measures, acute small-bowel injury on lumiracoxib treatment is less frequent than with naproxen plus omeprazole and similar to placebo.

Small bowel capsule endoscopy in 2007: indications, risks and limitations

Capsule endoscopy has revoluzionized the study of the small bowel by providing a reliable method to evaluate, endoscopically, the entire small bowel. In the last six years several papers have been published exploring the possible role of this examination in different clinical conditions. At the present time capsule endoscopy is generally recommended as a third examination, after negative bidirectional endoscopy, in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. A growing body of evidence suggests also an important role for this examination in other clinical conditions such as Crohn's disease, celiac disease, small bowel polyposis syndromes or small bowel tumors. The main complication of this examination is the retention of the device at the site of a previously unknown small bowel stricture. However there are also some other open issues mainly due to technical limitations of this tool (which is not driven from remote control, is unable to take biopsies, to insufflate air, to suck fluids or debris and sometimes to correctly size and locate lesions). The recently developed double balloon enteroscope, owing to its capability to explore a large part of the small bowel and to take targeted biopsies, although being invasive and time consuming, can overcome some limitations of capsule endoscopy. At the present time, in the majority of clinical conditions (i.e. obscure GI bleeding), the winning strategy seems to be to couple these two techniques to explore the small bowel in a painless, safe and complete way (with capsule endoscopy) and to define and treat the lesions identified (with double balloon enteroscopy).

Development of a capsule endoscopy scoring index for small bowel mucosal inflammatory change

BACKGROUND

Capsule endoscopy can identify small bowel mucosal inflammatory change. However, there has been no validated index for capsule endoscopy findings. This manuscript documents the development of such an index.

AIM

To develop a capsule endoscopy scoring index for small bowel mucosal inflammatory change.

METHODS

The index was created in four separate steps. First, parameters and descriptors of inflammatory change were identified. Secondly, blinded readers prospectively graded the presence or absence of each parameter on de-identified videos and graded a perceived global assessment of overall severity. Thirdly, the individual parameters and descriptors were ranked in order of severity. Fourthly, values for each parameter were created using the descent gradient methodology. The premise was to assure that the final numerical score reflected the global assessment and that the global assessment agreed with the ranking of finding severity. Results were compiled for the three categories: no or clinically insignificant change, mild change, and moderate or severe change. Thresholds were determined.

RESULTS

The final index includes three parameters: villous oedema, ulcer and stenosis. A score <135 is designated normal or clinically insignificant mucosal inflammatory change, a score between 135 and 790 is mild, and a score > or = 790 is moderate to severe.

CONCLUSION

This capsule endoscopy score provides a common language to quantify small bowel inflammatory changes.

COX-2 selective inhibitors in the treatment of osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitors (coxibs) in osteoarthritis (OA) and their gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, renovascular, and hepatic side effects compared with traditional nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen.

METHODS

Bibliographic database searches for randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and literature reviews.

RESULTS

Coxibs are comparable to traditional NSAIDs, providing moderate benefit for OA patients in pain and function versus placebo. NSAIDs, including coxibs, are superior to acetaminophen for OA, particularly in patients with moderate to severe pain. Coxibs decrease gastroduodenal ulcers (74% relative risk reduction) and ulcer complications (61% reduction) versus traditional NSAIDs. Meta-analysis of randomized trials indicates that coxibs increase the risk of myocardial infarctions approximately twofold versus placebo and versus naproxen, but do not increase the risk versus nonnaproxen NSAIDs. NSAIDs, including coxibs, commonly cause fluid retention and increase blood pressure and uncommonly induce congestive heart failure or significant renal dysfunction; risk factors include advanced age, hypertension, and heart or kidney disease. NSAIDs are a rare cause of clinical hepatotoxicity (<1 liver-related death per 100,000 NSAID users in clinical studies). Increased rates of aminotransferase elevations occur with rofecoxib (2%) and high-dose lumiracoxib (3%), and postmarketing cases of clinical liver injury with lumiracoxib have been reported recently.

CONCLUSIONS

Coxibs are as effective as traditional NSAIDs and superior to acetaminophen for the treatment of OA. Coxibs cause fewer gastrointestinal complications than traditional NSAIDs. Coxibs increase cardiovascular risk versus placebo and naproxen-but probably not versus nonnaproxen NSAIDs. Blood pressure commonly increases after initiation of selective or nonselective NSAIDs, especially in hypertensive patients.

Low-dose aspirin-induced gastrointestinal diseases: past, present, and future

Meta-analyses of randomized, placebo-controlled trials of low-dose aspirin indicate that aspirin approximately doubles the risk of major GI bleeding compared with placebo. The risk in Japanese may possibly be higher compared to Western populations, although the evidence is still lacking and prospective studies are required. Prior GI events, older age, and use of other injurious medicines such as NSAIDs, anticoagulants, and corticosteroids seem to be factors associated with an increased risk for upper GI bleeding among aspirin users. Prospective studies are needed to identify specific risk factors for upper GI bleeding in Japanese patients taking low-dose aspirin. There are many potential gastroprotective drugs available in Japan, and studies are needed to assess the relative effectiveness of various strategies including PPI use for the prevention of aspirin-related upper GI ulcer complications and whether any of these other agents also provide protection against small bowel or colonic damage. Aspirin-induced enteropathy is now increasingly being recognized and is presumably not uncommon, and the availability of new imaging techniques for the small intestine and noninvasive tests such as fecal calprotectin should allow rapid progress in this important area.

Small bowel capsule endoscopy in 2007: indications, risks and limitations

Capsule endoscopy has revoluzionized the study of the small bowel by providing a reliable method to evaluate, endoscopically, the entire small bowel. In the last six years several papers have been published exploring the possible role of this examination in different clinical conditions. At the present time capsule endoscopy is generally recommended as a third examination, after negative bidirectional endoscopy, in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. A growing body of evidence suggests also an important role for this examination in other clinical conditions such as Crohn's disease, celiac disease, small bowel polyposis syndromes or small bowel tumors. The main complication of this examination is the retention of the device at the site of a previously unknown small bowel stricture. However there are also some other open issues mainly due to technical limitations of this tool (which is not driven from remote control, is unable to take biopsies, to insufflate air, to suck fluids or debris and sometimes to correctly size and locate lesions). The recently developed double balloon enteroscope, owing to its capability to explore a large part of the small bowel and to take targeted biopsies, although being invasive and time consuming, can overcome some limitations of capsule endoscopy. At the present time, in the majority of clinical conditions (i.e. obscure GI bleeding), the winning strategy seems to be to couple these two techniques to explore the small bowel in a painless, safe and complete way (with capsule endoscopy) and to define and treat the lesions identified (with double balloon enteroscopy).

Clinical use and pharmacological properties of selective COX-2 inhibitors

Selective COX-2 inhibitors (coxibs) are approved for the relief of acute pain and symptoms of chronic inflammatory conditions such as osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). They have similar pharmacological properties but a slightly improved gastrointestinal (GI) safety profile if compared to traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs). However, long-term use of coxibs can be associated with an increased risk for cardiovascular (CV) adverse events (AEs). For this reason, two coxibs were withdrawn from the market. Currently celecoxib, etoricoxib, and lumiracoxib are used. These three coxibs differ in their chemical structure and selectivity for COX-2, which might explain some of their pharmacological features. Following oral administration, the less lipophilic celecoxib has a lower bioavailability (20-40%) than the other two coxibs (74-100%). All are eliminated by hepatic metabolism involving mainly CYP2C9 (celecoxib, lumiracoxib) and CYP3A4 (etoricoxib). Elimination half-life varies from 5 to 8 h (lumiracoxib), 11 to 16 h (celecoxib) and 19 to 32 h (etoricoxib). In patients with liver disease, plasma levels of celecoxib and etoricoxib are increased about two-fold. Clinical efficacies of the coxibs are comparable to tNSAIDs. There is an ongoing discussion about whether the slightly better GI tolerability (which is lost if acetylsalicylic acid is coadministered) of the coxibs is offset by their elevated risks for CV AEs (also seen with tNSAIDs other than naproxen), which apparently increase with dose and duration of exposure. In addition, the higher costs for coxibs (if compared to tNSAIDs, even when a "gastroprotective" proton pump inhibitor is coadministered) should be taken into consideration, if a coxib will be selected for certain patients with a high risk for GI complications. For such treatment, the lowest effective dose should be used for a limited time. Monitoring of kidney function and blood pressure appears advisable. It is hoped that further controlled studies can better define the therapeutic place of the coxibs.