Prevalence and Natural History of Segmental Colitis Associated With Diverticulosis.

INTRODUCTION: We assessed the prevalence and clinical outcomes of segmental colitis associated with diverticulosis (SCAD) in patients with newly diagnosed diverticulosis. METHODS: A 3-year international, multicenter, prospective cohort study was conducted involving 2,215 patients. RESULTS: SCAD diagnosis was posed in 44 patients (30 male patients; median age: 64.5 years; prevalence of 1.99%, 95% confidence interval, 1.45%-2.66%). Patients with SCAD types D and B showed worse symptoms, higher fecal calprotectin values, needed more steroids, and reached less likely complete remission. DISCUSSION: Although SCAD generally had a benign outcome, types B and D were associated with more severe symptoms and worse clinical course.

Prognostic performance of the 'DICA' endoscopic classification and the 'CODA' score in predicting clinical outcomes of diverticular disease: an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the predictive value of the Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) classification and to develop and validate a combined endoscopic-clinical score predicting clinical outcomes of diverticulosis, named Combined Overview on Diverticular Assessment (CODA). DESIGN: A multicentre, prospective, international cohort study. SETTING: 43 gastroenterology and endoscopy centres located in Europe and South America. PARTICIPANTS: 2215 patients (2198 completing the study) at the first diagnosis of diverticulosis/diverticular disease were enrolled. Patients were scored according to DICA classifications. INTERVENTIONS: A 3-year follow-up was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To predict the acute diverticulitis and the surgery according to DICA classification. Survival methods for censored observation were used to develop and validate a novel combined endoscopic-clinical score for predicting diverticulitis and surgery (CODA score). RESULTS: The 3-year cumulative probability of diverticulitis and surgery was of 3.3% (95% CI 2.5% to 4.5%) in DICA 1, 11.6% (95% CI 9.2% to 14.5%) in DICA 2 and 22.0% (95% CI 17.2% to 28.0%) in DICA 3 (p<0.001), and 0.15% (95% CI 0.04% to 0.59%) in DICA 1, 3.0% (95% CI 1.9% to 4.7%) in DICA 2 and 11.0% (95% CI 7.5% to 16.0%) in DICA 3 (p<0.001), respectively. The 3-year cumulative probability of diverticulitis and surgery was ≤4%, and ≤0.7% in CODA A; <10% and <2.5% in CODA B; >10% and >2.5% in CODA C, respectively. The CODA score showed optimal discrimination capacity in predicting the risk of surgery in the development (c-statistic: 0.829; 95% CI 0.811 to 0.846) and validation cohort (c-statistic: 0.943; 95% CI 0.905 to 0.981). CONCLUSIONS: DICA classification has a significant role in predicting the risk of diverticulitis and surgery in patients with diverticulosis, which is significantly enhanced by the CODA score. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02758860.

Bowel movement alterations predict the severity of diverticular disease and the risk of acute diverticulitis: a prospective, international st.

Background/Aims: Patients with diverticular disease (DD) frequently have abnormal bowel movements. However, it is unknown whether the entity of these alterations is associated with the severity of DD. We aimed to assess bowel habits and their relationship with the severity of DD according to Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) classification, Combined Overview on Diverticular Assessment (CODA) score, and fecal calprotectin (FC). Methods: An international, multicenter, prospective cohort study was conducted in 43 centers. A 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) was used to assess the severity of constipation and diarrhea. The association of constipation and diarrhea with DICA classification, CODA score, and basal FC was tested using non-parametric tests. Survival methods for censored observations were applied to test the association of constipation and diarrhea with the incidence of acute diverticulitis over a 3-year follow-up. Results: Of 871 patients with DD were included in the study. Of these, 208 (23.9%) and 199 (22.9%) reported a VAS score for constipation and diarrhea at least 3 at baseline, respectively. Higher constipation and diarrhea scores were associated with increasing DICA classification, CODA score and basal FC (P< 0.001). Constipation and diarrhea scores were independently associated with an increased hazard of developing acute diverticulitis (hazard ratio [HR]constipation = 1.15 per 1-VAS point increase, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.27; P=0.004; and HRdiarrhea =1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.26; P=0.014, respectively). Conclusions: In newly diagnosed patients with DD, higher endoscopic and combined scores of DD severity were associated with higher scores of constipation and diarrhea at baseline. Both constipation and diarrhea were independent prognostic factors of acute diverticulitis.

Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment classification, CODA score and fecal calprotectin in clinical assessment of patients with diverticular disease: A decision curve analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) classification and the Combined Overview on Diverticular Assessment (CODA) were found to be effective in predicting the outcomes of Diverticular Disease (DD). We ascertain whether fecal calprotectin (FC) can further aid in improving risk stratification. METHODS: A three-year international, multicentre, prospective cohort study was conducted involving 43 Gastroenterology and Endoscopy centres. Survival methods for censored observations were used to estimate the risk of acute diverticulitis (AD) in newly diagnosed DD patients according to basal FC, DICA, and CODA. The net benefit of management strategies based on DICA, CODA and FC in addition to CODA was assessed with decision curve analysis, which incorporates the harms and benefits of using a prognostic model for clinical decisions. RESULTS: At the first diagnosis of diverticulosis/DD, 871 participants underwent FC measurement. FC was associated with the risk of AD at 3 years (HR per each base 10 logarithm increase: 3.29; 95% confidence interval, 2.13-5.10) and showed moderate discrimination (c-statistic: 0.685; 0.614-0.756). DICA and CODA were more accurate predictors of AD than FC. However, FC showed high discrimination capacity to predict AD at 3 months, which was not maintained at longer follow-up times. The decision curve analysis comparing the combination of FC and CODA with CODA alone did not clearly indicate a larger net benefit of one strategy over the other. CONCLUSIONS: FC measurement could be used as a complementary tool to assess the immediate risk of AD. In all other cases, treatment strategies based on the CODA score alone should be recommended.