Background: The usefulness of thiopurines has been poorly explored in pouchitis and other pouch disorders. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of azathioprine as maintenance therapy in inflammatory pouch disorders. Design: This was a retrospective and multicentre study. Methods: We included patients diagnosed with inflammatory pouch disorders treated with azathioprine in monotherapy. Effectiveness was evaluated at 1 year and in the long term based on normalization of stool frequency, absence of pain, faecal urgency or fistula discharge (clinical remission), or any improvement in these symptoms (clinical response). Endoscopic response was evaluated using the Pouchitis Disease Activity Index (PDAI). Results: In all, 63 patients were included [54% males; median age, 49 (28-77) years]. The therapy was used to treat pouchitis (n = 37) or Crohn's disease of the pouch (n = 26). The rate of clinical response, remission and non-response at 12 months were 52%, 30% and 18%, respectively. After a median follow-up of 23 months (interquartile range 11-55), 19 patients (30%) were in clinical remission, and 45 (66%) stopped therapy. Endoscopic changes were evaluated in 19 cases. PDAI score decreased from 3 (range 2-4) to 1 (range 0-3). In all, 21 patients (33%) presented adverse events and 16 (25%) needed to stop therapy. Conclusion: Azathioprine may be effective in the long term for the treatment of inflammatory pouch disorders and could be included as a therapeutic option.
BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on the outcome of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in patients with solid organ transplantation (SOT). We describe the natural history of pre-existing IBD and de novo IBD after SOT. METHODS: This was a retrospective, multicenter study that included patients with pre-existing IBD at the time of SOT and patients with de novo IBD after SOT. The primary outcome was IBD progression, defined by escalation of medical treatment, surgical therapy, or hospitalization due to refractory IBD. Risk factors were identified using multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis. RESULTS: A total of 177 patients (106 pre-existing IBD and 71 de novo IBD) were included. Most patients with pre-existing IBD (92.5%) were in remission before SOT. During follow-up, 32% of patients with pre-existing IBD had disease progression, with a median time between SOT and IBD progression of 2.2 (interquartile range, 1.3-4.6) years. In the de novo cohort, 55% of patients had disease progression with a median time to flare of 1.9 (interquartile range, 0.8-3.9) years after diagnosis. In the pre-existing IBD cohort, active IBD at the time of SOT (hazard ratio, 1.80; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-2.84; Pâ =â .012) and the presence of extraintestinal manifestations (hazard ratio, 3.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.47-6.54; Pâ =â .003) were predictive factors for IBD progression. CONCLUSIONS: One-third of patients with pre-existing IBD and about half of patients with de novo IBD have disease progression after SOT. Active IBD at the time of SOT and the presence of extraintestinal manifestations were identified as risk factors for IBD progression.
