Laparoscopic ileocaecal resection versus infliximab for terminal ileitis in Crohn's disease: retrospective long-term follow-up of the LIR!C trial.

BACKGROUND: The LIR!C trial showed that laparoscopic ileocaecal resection is a cost-effective treatment that has similar quality-of-life outcomes to treatment with infliximab, an anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) drug. We aimed to compare long-term outcomes of both interventions and identify baseline factors associated with the duration of treatment effect in each group. METHODS: In this retrospective follow-up study, we collected data from patients who participated in the LIR!C trial, a multicentre randomised controlled trial that compared quality of life after surgical resection versus infliximab in adult patients with non-stricturing and immunomodulator-refractory ileocaecal Crohn's disease. From Jan 1 to May 1, 2018, we collected follow-up data from the time from enrolment in the LIR!C trial until the last visit at either the gastrointestinal surgeon or gastroenterologist. In this study, outcomes of interest were need for surgery or repeat surgery or anti-TNF therapy, duration of treatment effect, and identification of factors associated with the duration of treatment effect. Duration of treatment effect was defined as the time without need for additional Crohn's disease-related treatment (corticosteroids, immunomodulators, biologics, or surgery). FINDINGS: We collected long-term follow-up data for 134 (94%) of 143 patients included in the LIR!C trial, of whom 69 were in the resection group and 65 were in the infliximab group. Median follow-up was 63·5 months (IQR 39·0-94·5). In the resection group, 18 (26%) of 69 patients started anti-TNF therapy and none required a second resection. 29 (42%) patients in the resection group did not require additional Crohn's disease-related medication, although 14 (48%) of these patients were given prophylactic immunomodulator therapy. In the infliximab group, 31 (48%) of 65 patients had a Crohn's disease-related resection, and the remaining 34 patients maintained, switched, or escalated their anti-TNF therapy. Duration of treatment effect was similar in both groups, with a median time without additional Crohn's disease-related treatment of 33·0 months (95% CI 15·1-50·9) in the resection group and 34·0 months (0·0-69·3) in the infliximab group (log-rank p=0·52). In both groups, therapy with an immunomodulator, in addition to the allocated treatment, was associated with duration of treatment effect (hazard ratio for resection group 0·34 [95% CI 0·16-0·69] and for infliximab group 0·49 [0·26-0·93]). INTERPRETATION: These findings further support laparoscopic ileocaecal resection as a treatment option in patients with Crohn's disease with limited (affected segment ≤40 cm) and predominantly inflammatory terminal ileitis for whom conventional treatment is not successful. FUNDING: None.

Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic ileocaecal resection versus infliximab treatment of terminal ileitis in Crohn's disease: the LIR!C Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic ileocaecal resection compared with infliximab in patients with ileocaecal Crohn's disease failing conventional therapy. DESIGN: A multicentre randomised controlled trial was performed in 29 centres in The Netherlands and the UK. Adult patients with Crohn's disease of the terminal ileum who failed >3 months of conventional immunomodulators or steroids without signs of critical strictures were randomised to laparoscopic ileocaecal resection or infliximab. Outcome measures included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) based on the EuroQol (EQ) 5D-3L Questionnaire and the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ). Costs were measured from a societal perspective. Analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Missing cost and effect data were imputed using multiple imputation. Cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were estimated to show uncertainty. RESULTS: In total, 143 patients were randomised. Mean Crohn's disease total direct healthcare costs per patient at 1 year were lower in the resection group compared with the infliximab group (mean difference €-8931; 95% CI €-12 087 to €-5097). Total societal costs in the resection group were lower than in the infliximab group, however not statistically significant (mean difference €-5729, 95% CI €-10 606 to €172). The probability of resection being cost-effective compared with infliximab was 0.96 at a willingness to pay (WTP) of €0 per QALY gained and per point improvement in IBDQ Score. This probability increased to 0.98 at a WTP of €20 000/QALY gained and 0.99 at a WTP of €500/point of improvement in IBDQ Score. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic ileocaecal resection is a cost-effective treatment option compared with infliximab. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Registry NTR1150; EudraCT number 2007-005042-20 (closed on 14 October 2015).

Burden of disease and increasing prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease in a population-based cohort in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Reported epidemiology and phenotype distributions vary widely and disease burden of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is poorly described. Our aim was to establish these features in a population-based cohort covering 319 976 inhabitants. Furthermore, differences between tertiary referral and peripheral hospital patients were quantified. METHODS: IBD patients in the adherence area of three peripheral hospitals (2004-2012) were included. Medical and surgical treatment data were obtained. Quality of life and disease activity were evaluated. An outpatient cohort from a tertiary referral centre was accrued. RESULTS: A total of 1461 patients were included: 761 (52.1%) with ulcerative colitis (UC), 579 (39.5%) with Crohn's disease (CD) and 121 (8.3%) with IBD-unspecified. Point prevalence of IBD was 432.1 per 100 000 inhabitants in 2010, which increased significantly over time, P-value of less than 0.0001. The mean annual incidence was 17.2 for UC, 10.5 for CD and 2.2 for IBD-unspecified. Tertiary referral Crohn's patients used thiopurines and biological therapy and underwent surgery significantly more often than patients in peripheral hospitals (P<0.0001). Disease activity correlated negatively with quality of life (P<0.0001) in UC and CD. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of IBD is still increasing. Burden of disease was significantly more severe, mainly in Crohn's patients, in the referral centre, highlighting the importance of population-based studies to accurately describe phenotype distribution and disease burden.

Single-Port Surgery in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Review of Current Evidence.

The majority of patients with Crohn's disease and up to 35 % of patients with ulcerative colitis will ultimately require surgery during the course of their disease. Over the past few years, surgical techniques and experience in minimal invasive surgery have evolved resulting in single-incision laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this approach is to diminish the surgical trauma by reducing the number of incision sites. This review discusses the benefits and disadvantages of single-port surgery in various procedures in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Short-term postoperative results, functional outcome, and costs available in the literature will be discussed. Single-port surgery in IBD has several benefits when compared to multi-port laparoscopic surgery. By using fewer incisions, a potential reduction of postoperative pain with less morphine use can be accomplished. In addition, accelerated postoperative recovery can result in a shorter hospital stay. Furthermore, a superior cosmesis can be reached with placement of the port at the future ostomy site or at the umbilicus. Literature on single-port surgery in IBD consists mainly of case series and a few matched case series. These studies demonstrated that single-port surgery seems to be a safe and feasible approach for the surgical treatment of IBD patients.

Multimodal treatment of perianal fistulas in Crohn's disease: seton versus anti-TNF versus advancement plasty (PISA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently there is no guideline for the treatment of patients with Crohn's disease and high perianal fistulas. Most patients receive anti-TNF medication, but no long-term results of this expensive medication have been described, nor has its efficiency been compared to surgical strategies. With this study, we hope to provide treatment consensus for daily clinical practice with reduction in costs. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multicentre, randomized controlled trial. Patients with Crohn's disease who are over 18 years of age, with newly diagnosed or recurrent active high perianal fistulas, with one internal opening and no anti-TNF usage in the past three months will be considered. Patients with proctitis, recto-vaginal fistulas or anal stenosis will be excluded. Prior to randomisation, an MRI and ileocolonoscopy are required. All treatment will start with seton placement and a course of antibiotics. Patients will then be randomised to: (1) chronic seton drainage (with oral 6-mercaptopurine (6MP)) for one year, (2) anti-TNF medication (with 6MP) for one year (seton removal after six weeks) or (3) advancement plasty after eight weeks of seton drainage (under four months anti-TNF and 6MP for one year). The primary outcome parameter is the number of patients needing fistula-related re-intervention(s). Secondary outcomes are the number of patients with closed fistulas (based on an evaluated MRI score) after 18 months, disease activity, quality of life and costs. DISCUSSION: The PISA trial is a multicentre, randomised controlled trial of patients with Crohn's disease and high perianal fistulas. With the comparison of three generally accepted treatment strategies, we will be able to comment on the efficiency of the various treatment strategies, with respect to several long-term outcome parameters. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register identifier: NTR4137 (registered on 23 August 2013).