Consenso colombiano de Falla Intestinal Crónica en Síndrome de Intestino Corto / Colombian Consensus on Chronic Intestinal Failure in Short Bowel Syndrome

Introducción. Los términos falla intestinal crónica, síndrome de intestino corto (SIC) y nutrición parenteral total son muy frecuentes en la práctica clínica cotidiana.El objetivo de esta guía fue establecer un marco de referencia de práctica clínica basado en el mejor de nivel de evidencia en pacientes con falla intestinal crónica secundaria a síndrome de intestino corto. Métodos. Se estableció un grupo de expertos interdisciplinarios en el manejo de la falla intestinal crónica quienes, previa revisión de la literatura escogida, se reunieron de manera virtual acogiendo el método Delphi para discutir una serie de preguntas seleccionadas, enfocadas en el contexto terapéutico de la falla intestinal crónica asociada al síndrome de intestino corto. Resultados. La recomendación del grupo de expertos colombianos es que se aconseje a los pacientes con SIC consumir dietas regulares de alimentos integrales que genere hiperfagia para compensar la malabsorción. Las necesidades proteicas y energéticas dependen de las características individuales de cada paciente; la adecuación del régimen debe ser evaluada a través de pruebas clínicas, antropométricas y parámetros bioquímicos. Se sugiere, especialmente a corto plazo después de la resección intestinal, el uso de análogos de somatostatina para pacientes con yeyunostomía de alto gasto en quienes el manejo de líquidos y electrolitos es problemático. En pacientes con SIC, que son candidatos a tratamiento con enterohormonas, Teduglutida es la primera opción. Conclusión. Existen recomendaciones en el manejo integral de la rehabilitación intestinal respaldadas ampliamente por este consenso y es importante el reconocimiento de alternativas terapéuticos enmarcadas en el principio de buenas prácticas clínicas.

Introduction. The terms chronic intestinal failure, short bowel syndrome (SBS), and total parenteral nutrition are very common in daily clinical practice. The objective of this guideline was to establish a reference framework for clinical practice based on the best level of evidence in patients with chronic intestinal failure secondary to short bowel syndrome. Methods. A group of interdisciplinary experts in the management of chronic intestinal failure was established who, after reviewing the selected literature, met virtually using the Delphi method to discuss a series of selected questions, focused on the therapeutic context of chronic intestinal failure associated with short bowel syndrome. Results. The recommendation of the Colombian expert group is that patients with SBS be advised to consume regular diets of whole foods that generate hyperphagia to compensate malabsorption. Protein and energy needs depend on the individual characteristics of each patient; the adequacy of the regimen must be evaluated through clinical, anthropometric tests and biochemical parameters. The use of somatostatin analogue is suggested, especially in the short term after bowel resection, for patients with high-output jejunostomy in whom fluid and electrolyte management is problematic. In SBS, who are candidates for enterohormonal therapy, Teduglutide is the first choice. Conclusion. There are recommendations on the comprehensive management of intestinal rehabilitation that are widely supported by this consensus and it is important to recognize therapeutic alternatives framed in the principle of good clinical practice.

Low Performance of Sinovac Vaccine Particularly With Belatacept Therapy in a Study With Different Types of COVID-19 Vaccines in Transplanted Patients.

The huge impact of SARS-CoV-2 infections on organ transplant recipients makes it necessary to optimize vaccine efficacy in this population. To effectively implement multiple strategies, it is crucial to understand the performance of each type of available vaccine. In our study, the antibody titer was measured, and the presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was evaluated after 90 days of immunization; furthermore, the differences between hybrid immunity, immunity by vaccination, and immunosuppressant type were identified. As a result, of the patients included in this study (n = 160), 53% showed antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 90 days after the first dose in patients who had completed the vaccination schedule. Antibody titers were higher in patients with hybrid immunity, and the proportion of nonresponsive patients was higher among those who received the immunosuppressant belatacept in their post-transplant regimen (P = .01). Only 15% of patients treated with this medicine seroconverted and patients vaccinated with CoronaVac and treated with belatacept showed no response. In conclusion, a reduced response to vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 was identified in the transplant population, and this response varied with the type of vaccine administered and the immunosuppressive treatment.

Induction Versus Maintenance Immunosuppression After Intestinal Transplant: Determining Which Treatment Most Impacts Long-Term Patient And Graft Survival.

OBJECTIVES: Immunosuppressive strategies for intestinal transplant have changed over time. However, specific intestinal transplant-oriented protocols and reports on long-term maintenance regimens are scarce. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of 2 different initial immunosuppressive protocols based on thymoglobulin (group A) and basiliximab (anti-interleukin 2 antibody) (group B) and of changes to maintenance immunosuppression over long-term follow-up in intestinal transplant recipients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively established protocol for intestinal transplant immunosuppression, conducted between May 2006 and December 2020. We analyzed 51 intestinal transplant recipients, with 6 patients excluded because of early death or graft loss. Acute cellular rejection frequency and grade, number of acute cellular rejection episodes, time to the first acute cellular rejection episode, response to treatment, number of patients who progressed to chronic allograft rejection, kidney function, infections, incidence of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder and graft-versus-host disease, and patient and graft survival were analyzed. RESULTS: In the study groups, there were 87 acute cellular rejection episodes in 45 patients (33 in group A and 54 in group B). We found degree of acute cellular rejection to be mild in 45 patients, moderate in 18, and severe in 24 (not significant between groups). Our comparison of induction therapy (thymoglobulin [group A] vs interleukin 2 antibody [group B]) did not show any statistical difference during clinical followup. Long-term review showed that all patients were on tacrolimus. Five-year patient and graft survival rates were 62% and 45% for group A and 54% and 46% for group B, respectively (not significant). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term patient and graft outcomes reflected the use of an individualized follow-up with adjustments and changes in immunosuppressive medications according to the patient's clinical course and complications rather than based on the induction immunosuppressive protocol used.