ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The coexistence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is uncommon. Data on the impact of HIV on IBD course and its management is scarce. AIM: To describe the IBD phenotype, therapeutic requirements and prevalence of opportunistic infections (OI) in IBD patients with a coexistent HIV infection. METHODS: Case-control, retrospective study including all HIV positive patients diagnosed with IBD in the ENEIDA registry. Patients with positive HIV serology (HIV-IBD) were compared to controls (HIV seronegative), matched 1:3 by year of IBD diagnosis, age, gender and type of IBD. RESULTS: A total of 364 patients (91 HIV-IBD and 273 IBD controls) were included. In the whole cohort, 58% had ulcerative colitis (UC), 35% had Crohn's disease (CD) and 7% were IBD unclassified. The HIV-IBD group presented a significantly higher proportion of proctitis in UC and colonic location in CD but fewer extraintestinal manifestations than controls. Regarding treatments, non-biological therapies (37.4% vs. 57.9%; P=0.001) and biologicals (26.4% vs. 42.1%; P=0.007), were used less frequently among patients in the HIV-IBD group. Conversely, HIV-IBD patients developed more OI than controls regardless of non-biological therapies use. In the multivariate analysis, HIV infection (OR 4.765, 95%CI 2.48-9.14; P<0.001) and having ≥1 comorbidity (OR 2.445, 95%CI 1.23-4.85; P=0.010) were risk factors for developing OI, while CD was protective (OR 0.372, 95%CI 0.18-0.78;P=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: HIV infection appears to be associated with a less aggressive phenotype of IBD and a lesser use of non-biological therapies and biologicals but entails a greater risk of developing OI.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Intra-abdominal abscesses complicating Crohn's disease (CD) are a challenging situation. Their management, during the hospitalization and after resolution, is still unclear. METHODS: Adult patients with CD complicated with intraabdominal abscess who required hospitalization were included from the prospectively maintained ENEIDA registry from GETECCU. Initial strategy effectiveness and safety to resolve abscess was assessed. Survival analysis was performed to evaluate recurrence risk. Predictive factors associated with resolution were evaluated by multivariate regression and predictive factors associated with recurrence were assessed by Cox regression. RESULTS: 520 patients from 37 Spanish hospitals were included; 322 (63%) were initially treated with antibiotics alone, 128 (26%) with percutaneous drainage, and 54 (17%) with surgical drainage. The size of the abscess was critical to the effectiveness of each treatment. In abscesses < 30mm, the antibiotic was as effective as percutaneous or surgical drainage. However, in larger abscesses, percutaneous or surgical drainage was superior. In abscesses > 50mm, surgery was superior to percutaneous drainage, although it was associated with a higher complication rate. After abscess resolution, luminal resection was associated with a lower 1-year abscess recurrence risk (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.24-0.76). However, those patients who initiated anti-TNF therapy had a similar recurrence risk whether luminal resection had been performed. CONCLUSIONS: Small abscesses (<30mm) can be managed with antibiotics alone, while larger ones require drainage. Percutaneous drainage will be effective and safer than surgery in many cases. After discharge, anti-TNF therapy reduces abscess recurrence risk in a similar way to bowel resection.