Optimal delivery of follow-up care after surgery for Crohn's disease: current perspectives

Natural History and Risk Stratification of Recurrent Crohn's Disease After Ileocolonic Resection: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Prediction of endoscopic postoperative recurrence (POR) and prophylactic treatment based on clinical risk profile have thus far been inconclusive. This study aimed to examine the association between clinical risk profile and the development of endoscopic POR in a Crohn's disease population without postoperative treatment and to identify individual risk factors of endoscopic POR.

METHODS

Medical records of 142 patients with Crohn's disease during follow-up after ileocecal or ileocolonic resection without prophylactic treatment at 3 referral centers were reviewed. Endoscopic POR was defined as a modified Rutgeerts score ≥i2b. Clinical risk profiles were distilled from current guidelines. Both uni- and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to assess the relationship between risk profiles and endoscopic POR.

RESULTS

Endoscopic POR was observed in 68 out of 142 (47.9%) patients. Active smoking postsurgery (odds ratio [OR], 3.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24-7.34; P = 0.02), a Montreal classification of A3 (OR, 3.05; 95% CI, 1.07-8.69; P = 0.04), and previous bowel resections (OR, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.07-6.22; P = 0.03) were significantly associated with endoscopic POR. No significant association was observed between endoscopic POR and any guideline defined as a high-/low-risk profile. However, patients with a combination of any 3 or more European Crohns & Colitis Organisation- (OR, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.30-18.29; P = 0.02) or British Society of Gastroenterology-defined (OR 3.16; 95% CI, 1.05-9.49; P = 0.04) risk factors showed increased odds of developing endoscopic POR.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that patients with a combination of any 3 or more European Crohns & Colitis Organisation- or British Society of Gastroenterology-defined risk factors would probably benefit from immediate prophylactic treatment.

Ileocolonic End-to-End Anastomoses in Crohn's Disease Increase the Risk of Early Post-operative Endoscopic Recurrence in Those Undergoing an Emergency Resection

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Several risk factors affecting post-operative recurrence in Crohn's disease patients have been studied, and of these, the role of the anastomosis remains contentious. We aimed to compare the risk of developing early post-operative endoscopic recurrence (EPER), in resections that had an end-to-end anastomosis (ETEA) to a side-to-side anastomosis (STSA).

METHODS

All Crohn's disease patients that underwent an ileocolic or small bowel resection between January 2012 and June 2017 at two tertiary IBD centres were reviewed retrospectively. Included patients had a minimum of 12-month clinical follow-up and a colonoscopy within 12 months of the resection or stoma reversal. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses determined the independent risk factors for early post-operative endoscopic recurrence, defined as a Rutgeerts score of ≥ i2b.

RESULTS

Ninety-two resections associated with an ETEA or a STSA were included for analysis. The ETEA was the most common anastomosis, constructed in 55 patients (59.8%). Forty-nine operations (53.3%) resulted in a ≥ i2b recurrence at the first surveillance colonoscopy. The multivariate analysis showed that there was no difference between the ETEA and STSA in determining the odds ratio (OR) for developing EPER (OR = 2.41 (0.95-6.05), P = 0.06). In those that underwent a resection emergently however, the significant determinants of EPER were as follows: having an ETEA (OR = 38.12 (2.44-595.87), P = 0.01), failing to commence a biologic and/or an immunosuppressant early (OR = 24.21 (1.69, 347.81), P = 0.02), and active smoking (OR = 7.19 (1.12-46.21), P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The ETEA is best avoided in those undergoing an emergency resection. The early commencement of a biologic and/or an immunosuppressant and smoking cessation is imperative this high-risk group of patients.

Endoscopy in inflammatory bowel disease: from guidelines to real life

Endoscopy has a central role in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), providing crucial data for diagnostic and therapeutic decisions, treating disease-related complications, and assisting in the early detection of dysplasia and prevention of colorectal cancer in the setting of IBD. Treatment targets have significantly shifted in IBD, focusing on achieving mucosal healing, a more meaningful endpoint than clinical remission. With the emergence of novel therapies, we aim to alter the course of the disease and prevent irreversible damage to the bowel. To that end, obtaining reliable and reproducible assessments of endoscopic disease activity has become an issue of great importance. Although several guidelines include recommendations regarding endoscopic surveillance in patients with long-standing IBD, there is an open debate regarding the best examination method and the appropriate follow-up intervals. Another important issue is whether surveillance guidelines are actually implemented in real-life practice and what is the preferred surveillance method among endoscopists. Significant changes have occurred in the endoscopic world with the development of new diagnostic and therapeutic modalities and their incorporation in everyday practice. We aimed to assess the real-life application of guideline recommendations regarding endoscopy in IBD patients and to review newly emerged data which might impact these recommendations in the near future.

Surgery in the age of biologics

Since the introduction of the first anti-tumor necrosis factor antibodies in the late 1990s, biologic therapy has revolutionized the medical treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Nevertheless, surgery continues to play a significant role in treating IBD patients. Rates of intestinal resection in patients with Crohn's disease or colectomy in ulcerative colitis are reducing but not substantially over the long term. An increasing variety of biologic medications are now available to treat IBD patients in various clinical situations. Consequently, a number of questions persist about how biologic medications affect the need for surgery and overall course in IBD patients. Given the trend for earlier and more frequent use of biologic medications in IBD patients, a working knowledge of the effects of these medications on surgical decision-making and outcomes is essential for the practicing colorectal surgeon and gastroenterologist. This review seeks to summarize the relevant literature surrounding biologic use and IBD surgery with a focus on the effect of biologics on the frequency, type and complications of surgery in this 'age of biologics'.

Surgery in the age of biologics

Since the introduction of the first anti-tumor necrosis factor antibodies in the late 1990s, biologic therapy has revolutionized the medical treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Nevertheless, surgery continues to play a significant role in treating IBD patients. Rates of intestinal resection in patients with Crohn's disease or colectomy in ulcerative colitis are reducing but not substantially over the long term. An increasing variety of biologic medications are now available to treat IBD patients in various clinical situations. Consequently, a number of questions persist about how biologic medications affect the need for surgery and overall course in IBD patients. Given the trend for earlier and more frequent use of biologic medications in IBD patients, a working knowledge of the effects of these medications on surgical decision-making and outcomes is essential for the practicing colorectal surgeon and gastroenterologist. This review seeks to summarize the relevant literature surrounding biologic use and IBD surgery with a focus on the effect of biologics on the frequency, type and complications of surgery in this 'age of biologics'.