Almost One-Third of Large Sessile Serrated Polyps Are Missed on CT Colonography.

BACKGROUND: Nearly one-third of colorectal cancers (CRC) arise via the serrated pathway. CT colonography (CTC) is a CRC screening examination. Endoscopic detection of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) varies widely; it is unknown whether CTC effectively detects SSPs. The aim of this study is to determine whether CTC detects SSPs at an institution that performs a large volume of CTC. METHODS: We conducted a search of pathology records to identify serrated polyps (SPs) from 2005 to 2012. We extracted demographic data from the electronic health records (EHRs) of subjects with an SSP and examined endoscopy reports for location and size of each SSP. We identified subjects with a CTC within 1 year prior to the colonoscopy that found an SSP, and determined if the CTC identified the SSP. RESULTS: Our search found 3978 subjects with SP over the 7-year period. Seven hundred thirty-two subjects had at least 1 SSP. Eightytwo subjects had CTC done within 1 year prior to the colonoscopy that identified SSP. Seventy-nine subjects' polyps were identified on CTC. CT colonography was done an average of 38 ± 54 days prior to colonoscopy. One hundred fifteen SSPs were identified endoscopically. A total of 48.7% of all SSPs were identified via CTC; larger SSPs were more likely to be seen on CTC (P < .001), and 69.6% of SSPs larger than 10 mm were found via CTC. Proximal SSPs were more often identified than distal SSPs (P = .005). CONCLUSION: Given the miss rate for SSPs on CTC, endoscopists should be vigilant about examining the proximal colon in subjects referred after CTC, even if the imaging does not reveal a proximal polyp.

Levels of Vitamin D Are Low After Crohn's Disease Is Established But Not Before.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Low serum levels of vitamin D have been associated with Crohn's disease (CD). However, it is unclear whether low vitamin D levels cause CD or CD reduces serum vitamin D. METHODS: United States military personnel with CD (n = 240) and randomly selected individuals without CD (controls, n = 240) were matched by age, sex, race, military branch, and geography. We measured 25-hydroxyvitamin D in sera 8-3 years (pre-2) and 3 years to 3 months before diagnosis (pre-1) and 3 months before through 21 months after diagnosis (pre-0). We genotyped VDR and GC vitamin D related polymorphisms. We used conditional logistic regression, including adjustments for smoking, season, enlistment status, and deployment, to estimate relative odds of CD according to vitamin D levels and interactions between genetic factors and levels of vitamin D. RESULTS: Levels of vitamin D before diagnosis were not associated with CD in pre-2 (P trend = .65) or pre-1 samples (P trend = .84). However, we found an inverse correlation between CD and highest tertile of vitamin D level in post-diagnosis samples (P trend = .01; odds ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30-0.86). Interactions were not detected between vitamin D levels and VDR or GC polymorphisms. We observed an association between VDR Taq1 polymorphism and CD (independent of vitamin D) (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: In serum samples from military personnel with CD and matched controls, we found no evidence for an association between CD and vitamin D levels up to 8 years before diagnosis. However, we observed an inverse-association between post-diagnosis vitamin D levels and CD. These findings suggest that low vitamin D does not contribute to development of CD-instead, CD leads to low vitamin D.

Continuing Medical Education Questions: December 2019.

Article Title: Colonic Manifestations and Complications Are Relatively Under-reported in Systemic Sclerosis: A Systematic Review.

Continuing Medical Education Questions: July 2019.

Article Title: The Gut Microbiome in Other Chronic Immune Disease: Lessons for Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Continuing Medical Education Questions: March 2019.

To receive CME/MOC credit for this activity, please go to: http://acgjournalcme.gi.org/Article Title: ACG Clinical Guideline: Ulcerative Colitis in Adults.

The dose of omeprazole required to achieve adequate intraesophageal acid suppression in patients with gastroesophageal junction specialized intestinal metaplasia and Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND: The mainstay of medical therapy for Barrett's esophagus is normalization of esophageal acid exposure with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). However, the optimal dose and whether once daily or twice daily is required for acid suppression is unknown. AIM: The purpose of this study was to assess whether adequate intra-esophageal acid suppression could be achieved with once daily versus twice daily omeprazole in patients with gastroesophageal specialized intestinal metaplasia (GEJSIM), short-segment (SSBE) and long-segment Barrett's esophagus (LSBE). METHODS: Patients with GEJSIM and Barrett's esophagus underwent upper endoscopy with 48-h wireless pH capsule while on once daily 20 mg omeprazole for at least 1 week. If intra-esophageal acid was not adequately controlled, defined as pH value <4 for greater than 4.2 % of the time during the second 24-h period, omeprazole was increased to twice daily for 1 week and upper endoscopy with wireless pH capsule was repeated. RESULTS: A total of 36 patients completed the study (10 patients had GEJSIM, 16 patients had SSBE, and 10 patients had LSBE). Normalization of intraesophageal pH was achieved in 28 patients (78 %) with once daily PPI and eight patients required twice daily PPI. There was no significant difference between the three groups in the proportion of patients requiring high dose PPI (GEJSIM 10 %, SSBE 25 %, LSBE 30 %, p = 0.526). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with Barrett's esophagus were controlled with once daily low dose PPI and only a minority required twice daily dosing, regardless of the length of Barrett's mucosa.

Inflammatory bowel disease prevalence by age, gender, race, and geographic location in the U.S. military health care population.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data examining the prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in a diverse North American population. METHODS: Using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes, patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) seen within the military health care system (Tricare) from October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009 were identified. This database comprised all active duty military, retirees, and dependents. The overall prevalence of IBD, UC, and CD was calculated, and the prevalence by age, gender, race, and geographic location. RESULTS: A total of 35,404 cases of IBD were identified in 10.2 million military health care beneficiaries establishing a prevalence of total IBD, UC, and CD of 348, 202, and 146 per 100,000, respectively. IBD was more prevalent in females compared with males (417 versus 284 per 100,000; relative risk, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.50-1.57). There was an increased prevalence of IBD with each decade of life. IBD was more common in Caucasians (324 per 100,000) compared with blacks, Asians, Hispanics, and American Indians (239, 162, 147, and 224 per 100,000, respectively; relative risk, 1.60; 95% confidence interval, 1.53-1.67). There was no difference in prevalence when comparing Northern versus Southern states (339 versus 333 per 100,000, respectively, P = 0.114). CONCLUSIONS: This large population study establishes a prevalence of IBD, UC, and CD (348, 202, and 146 per 100,000, respectively) in the military health care population. The prevalence of IBD, UC, and CD was higher in females and with increasing age, whereas IBD was most common in whites compared with other ethnicities in our patient population.

Randomized controlled trial comparing aerosolized swallowed fluticasone to esomeprazole for esophageal eosinophilia.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with clinical symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and dense eosinophilic infiltration of the esophageal mucosa are suspected to have eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Topical steroids are often used as first-line therapy for EoE, although some patients respond clinically to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The purpose of this study was to compare the histological and clinical response of patients with esophageal eosinophilia treated with aerosolized swallowed fluticasone propionate vs. esomeprazole. METHODS: This prospective single-blinded randomized controlled trial enrolled newly diagnosed patients with suspected EoE, defined as having clinical symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction with at least 15 eosinophils/high power field (hpf). Patients underwent 24-h pH/impedance monitoring to establish gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Patients were stratified by the presence of GERD and randomized to receive fluticasone 440 mcg twice daily or esomeprazole 40 mg once daily for 8 weeks followed by repeat endoscopy with biopsies. The primary outcome was histological response of esophageal eosinophilia, defined as <7 eosinophils/hpf. Secondary outcomes included clinical change in symptoms using the validated Mayo dysphagia questionnaire (MDQ) and interval change in endoscopic findings following treatment. RESULTS: Forty-two patients (90% male, 81% white, mean age 38 ± 10 years) were randomized into fluticasone (n = 21) and esomeprazole (n = 21) treatment arms. In all, 19% (8/42) of patients had coexisting GERD and were equally stratified into each arm (n = 4). Overall, there was no significant difference in resolution of esophageal eosinophilia between fluticasone and esomeprazole (19 vs. 33%, P = 0.484). In patients with established GERD, resolution of esophageal eosinophilia was noted in 0% (0/4) of the fluticasone group compared with 100% (4/4) of the esomeprazole group (P = 0.029). In GERD-negative patients, there was no significant difference in resolution of esophageal eosinophilia between treatment arms with fluticasone and esomeprazole (24 vs.18%, P = 1.00). The MDQ score significantly decreased after treatment with esomeprazole (19 ± 21 vs. 1.4 ± 4.5, P<0.001), but not with fluticasone (17 ± 18 vs. 12 ± 16, P = 0.162). Improvement in endoscopic findings and other histological markers were similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fluticasone and esomeprazole provide a similar histological response for esophageal eosinophilia. With regard to clinical response, esomeprazole was superior to fluticasone, particularly in patients with established GERD.

Probiotics for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease.

Probiotics are organisms which provide a desired and beneficial effect on human health. With recent evidence implicating a disruption in the balance of the gastrointestinal microbiome and intestinal immunity as a potential trigger for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), there has been growing interest in using probiotics as an adjunct to standard anti-inflammatory and immune suppressing therapy. Animal models describe potential and plausible mechanisms of action for probiotics to counter inflammation of colonic mucosa. Although there are insufficient data to recommend probiotics in ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease, good evidence supports the use of specific probiotics for maintenance of remission in pouchitis. Although there are limited regulatory standards for the agents, probiotics are relatively safe with minimal reported side effects or contraindications. More rigorous studies need to be published supporting efficacy and safety of these agents before they become a mainstay of IBD medical treatment.

Esophageal motor disorders in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: An association between eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and esophageal motility disorders has been described in small studies. AIMS: The aim of this study was to describe the prevalence of esophageal motor disorders in a large cohort of adults with EoE and examine whether an association exists between esophageal dysmotility and dysphagia. METHODS: A retrospective review of esophageal manometry studies in adult EoE patients was performed. Tracings were reviewed for abnormalities including nutcracker esophagus and ineffective swallows, defined as low amplitude peristalsis (<30 mmHg) or non-propagating contractions. Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) was categorized as mild (30-40% ineffective swallows), moderate (50-60% ineffective swallows), and severe (≥70% ineffective swallows). Dysphagia was graded on a 0-3 scale for frequency and severity. RESULTS: Seventy-five tracings from EoE patients were reviewed (85% male, mean age 41 ± 12 years). IEM was identified in 25 patients and categorized as mild (n = 13), moderate (n = 6), and severe (n = 6). Nutcracker esophagus was found in three patients. There was no significant difference in eosinophil count among the motility groups: normal 46.5 ± 3.1, mild IEM 56.9 ± 36.9, moderate IEM 45.5 ± 23.7, severe IEM 34.3 ± 12.6 (P = 0.157). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of EoE patients, the majority had normal esophageal motility studies, although a subset of these patients had some esophageal dysmotility. It is unlikely that esophageal dysmotility is a major contributing factor to dysphagia, although it is reasonable to consider esophageal manometry testing in EoE patients to identify potential abnormalities of the smooth muscle esophagus.