Quantifying the rate of recurrence of postoperative Crohn's disease with biological therapy. A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Preventing the postoperative recurrence (POR) of Crohn's disease (CD) poses a significant challenge to clinicians. With the advent of biologics, various studies have observed a reduction of recurrence after surgery. Hence, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the rate of POR at different time points in the era of biologic use. METHODS: We performed a literature search using Medline and Embase databases for studies investigating biologics in preventing the POR of CD. Data were extracted, and a single-arm meta-analysis with generalized linear mixed model and Clopper-Pearson method for confidence interval (CI) was performed to identify endoscopic, clinical and surgical recurrence rates at 6 months and 1, 2 and 5 years postoperatively. RESULTS: Altogether 24 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The endoscopic, clinical and surgical POR rate with the use of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α agents at 1 year was 21.72% (95% CI 16.28%-28.37%), 13.06% (95% CI 8.18%-18.92%) and 3.76% (95% CI 1.37%-9.91%), respectively. The 5-year recurrence rate was 84.21% (95% CI 72.35%-91.57%) and 17.49% (95% CI 9.17%-30.80%) for endoscopic and surgical recurrence, respectively. Subgroup analyses at 1 year for the type of anti-TNF-α agent or the timing of initiation after surgery showed no significant difference in endoscopic, clinical and surgical recurrence rates. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-TNF-α agents are effective at preventing clinical, endoscopic and surgical POR of CD. The timing of initiating biological therapy after surgery has no significant effect on the rate of POR. The efficacy of infliximab and adalimumab for postoperative recurrence prevention is similar.

Moving beyond the initial colonoscopy: a call for action.

INTRODUCTION: The evolution of colorectal screening has made headway with continual efforts globally to increase screening rates for colonoscopy-naïve patients. However, little has been done to encourage repeat colonoscopies after the initial scope despite recommendations to repeat colonoscopy every 10 years, with the uptake rates of repeat colonoscopy remaining abysmal at 22%. METHODS: Previously, a qualitative systematic review evaluated the barriers and facilitators patients faced in their decisions to undergo colonoscopy, analyzing articles from Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Key findings from articles which highlighted factors influencing patients' decisions to return for repeat colonoscopies were summarized. RESULTS: Three articles were identified in the search. Facilitators for repeat colonoscopy included patients' assurance garnered from fostered trust in the patient-provider relationship, their intrinsic motivations from fear of cancer and an innate appreciation for the significance of obtaining repeated colonoscopies. Procedural factors such as the option for procedural visualization, its comprehensiveness and the utilization of anesthesia were also crucial motivators. Barriers that patients highlighted comprised of cumbersome bowel preparation and potential complications. DISCUSSION: Recently, minimal research has been conducted on the sentiments of healthcare providers and patients regarding repeat colonoscopy. The lack of emphasis from healthcare institutions on encouraging patients to repeat colonoscopy after 10 years prevents effective colorectal cancer screening. To proficiently alleviate the burden of colorectal cancer, patient counseling has to shift beyond explaining colonoscopy risks and complications to promoting regular follow-up scopes. This article thus calls for more studies to focus on evaluating the uptake of repeat colonoscopies.