Efficacy, Tolerability, and Safety of Low-Volume Bowel Preparations for Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: The French Multicentre CLEAN Study.

BACKGROUND: Standard high-volume polyethylene glycol [PEG] bowel preparations [PEG-4L] are recommended for patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] undergoing colonoscopy. However, low-volume preparations [≤2 L of active volume] are often used in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of the various bowel preparations for patients with IBD, including low-volume preparations. METHODS: We conducted a French prospective multicentre observational study over a period of 1 month. Patients aged 18-75 years with IBD with an indication of colonoscopy independent of the study were enrolled. The choice of the preparation was left to the investigators, as per their usual protocol. The patients' characteristics, disease, and colonoscopy characteristics were recorded, and they were given self-reported questionnaires. RESULTS: Twenty-five public and private hospitals enrolled 278 patients. Among them, 46 had a disease flare and 41 had bowel stenoses. Bowel preparations for colonoscopy were as follows: 42% received PEG-2L, 29% received sodium picosulfate [Pico], 15% received PEG-4L, and 14% had other preparations. The preparation did not reach the Boston's score efficacy outcome in the PEG-4L group in 51.2% of the patients [p = 0.0011]. The preparation intake was complete for 59.5% in the PEG-4L group, compared with 82.9% in the PEG-2L group and 93.8% in the Pico group [p < 0.0001]. Tolerability, as assessed by the patients' VAS, was significantly better for both Pico and PEG-2L compared with PEG-4L, and better for Pico compared with PEG-2L [p = 0.008; p = 0.0003]. In multivariate analyses, low-volume preparations were independent factors of efficacy and tolerability. Adverse events occurred in 4.3% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Preparations with PEG-2L and Pico were equally safe, with better efficacy and tolerability outcomes compared with PEG-4L preparations. The best efficacy/tolerance/safety profile was achieved with the Pico preparation.

Long-term consequences of bile duct injury after cholecystectomy.

Late complications arising after bile duct injury (BDI) include biliary strictures, hepatic atrophy, cholangitis and intra-hepatic lithiasis. Later, fibrosis or even secondary biliary cirrhosis and portal hypertension can develop, enhanced by prolonged biliary obstruction associated with recurrent cholangitis. Secondary biliary cirrhosis resulting in associated hepatic failure or digestive tract bleeding due to portal hypertension is a substantial risk factor for morbidity and mortality after bile duct repair. Parameters that determine the management of late complications of BDI include the type of biliary injury, associated vascular injury, hepatic atrophy, the presence of intra-hepatic strictures or lithiasis, repetitive infectious complications, the quality of underlying parenchyma (fibrosis, secondary biliary cirrhosis) and the presence of portal hypertension. Endoscopic drainage is indicated for patients with uncontrolled acute sepsis, patients at high operative risk, patients with cirrhosis who are not eligible for liver transplantation and patients who have previously undergone several attempts at repair. Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, whether de novo or as an iterative repair, is the technique of reference for post-cholecystectomy BDI. Hepatic resection is indicated in only rare instances, mainly in case of extended hilar stricture, multiple stone retention in one sector of the liver or in patients for whom the repair is deemed technically difficult. Liver transplantation is indicated only in exceptional circumstances, when secondary biliary cirrhosis is associated with liver failure and portal hypertension.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided vascular therapy: is it safe and effective?

Recent developments in therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have enabled new approaches to the management of refractory gastrointestinal bleeding, including EUS-guided sclerotherapy and vessel embolization. Few cases have been reported in the literature. Eight patients were admitted for severe, refractory gastrointestinal bleeding, seven of whom were actively bleeding. Causes of bleeding were gastric varices secondary to portal hypertension (n = 3); gastroduodenal artery aneurysm or fundal aneurysmal arterial malformation (n = 3); and Dieulafoy's ulcer (n = 2); the latter five patients having arterial bleeding. During the procedures, the bleeding vessel was punctured with a 19-gauge needle then injected with a sclerosing agent (cyanoacrylate glue [n = 6] or polidocanol 2 % [n = 2]) under Doppler control. The median follow-up time was 9 months (3 - 18 months). In all 10 endoscopic procedures were performed. The procedure was successful at the first attempt in seven out of eight patients (87.5 %). No clinical complications were observed, although in one case there was diffusion of cyanoacrylate in the hepatic artery. The seven successful cases all showed immediate and complete disappearance of the Doppler flow signal at the end of the procedure. This retrospective study highlights the utility of EUS-guided vascular therapy. However, more large randomized studies should be conducted to confirm these results.