Environmental impact of single-use versus reusable gastroscopes.

INTRODUCTION: The environmental impact of endoscopy is a topic of growing interest. This study aimed to compare the carbon footprint of performing an esogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with a reusable (RU) or with a single-use (SU) disposable gastroscope. METHODS: SU (Ambu aScope Gastro) and RU gastroscopes (Olympus, H190) were evaluated using life cycle assessment methodology (ISO 14040) including the manufacture, distribution, usage, reprocessing and disposal of the endoscope. Data were obtained from Edouard Herriot Hospital (Lyon, France) from April 2023 to February 2024. Primary outcome was the carbon footprint (measured in Kg CO2 equivalent) for both gastroscopes per examination. Secondary outcomes included other environmental impacts. A sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the impact of varying scenarios. RESULTS: Carbon footprint of SU and RU gastroscopes were 10.9 kg CO2 eq and 4.7 kg CO2 eq, respectively. The difference in carbon footprint equals one conventional car drive of 28 km or 6 days of CO2 emission of an average European household. Based on environmentally-extended input-output life cycle assessment, the estimated per-use carbon footprint of the endoscope stack and washer was 0.18 kg CO2 eq in SU strategy versus 0.56 kg CO2 eq in RU strategy. According to secondary outcomes, fossil eq depletion was 130 MJ (SU) and 60.9 MJ (RU) and water depletion for 6.2 m3 (SU) and 9.5 m3 (RU), respectively. CONCLUSION: For one examination, SU gastroscope have a 2.5 times higher carbon footprint than RU ones. These data will help with the logistics and planning of an endoscopic service in relation to other economic and environmental factors.

Comparison of short- and long-term effectiveness between ustekinumab and vedolizumab in patients with Crohn's disease refractory to anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy.

BACKGROUND: The best option between vedolizumab and ustekinumab after anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) failure remains unclear in Crohn's disease. AIMS: To compare the short- and long-term effectiveness of vedolizumab and ustekinumab in Crohn's disease patients with prior anti-TNF exposure. METHODS: All Crohn's disease patients treated with ustekinumab or vedolizumab after exposure to at least one anti-TNF agent were included from two referral centres. Primary endpoint was corticosteroid-free clinical remission defined as Crohn's disease activity index <150 at week 54. Deep remission (corticosteroid-free clinical remission and faecal calprotectin <100 µg/g) was assessed at week 14. Propensity-matched analyses were applied to make the two groups comparable. RESULTS: Overall, 312 patients (ustekinumab = 224 and vedolizumab = 88) were included. After propensity score analysis, ustekinumab was more effective to achieve corticosteroid-free clinical remission at week 54 (49.3% vs 41.2%, P = 0.04) and deep remission at Week 14 (25.9% vs 3.8%, P = 0.02) than vedolizumab. The rate of primary nonresponders (6.7% vs 14.8%, P = 0.034) and the long-term risk of drug discontinuation due to therapeutic failure (HR = 1.53 [1.04-2.07], P = 0.029) were lower in patients treated with ustekinumab compared with vedolizumab. Predictors of ustekinumab failure were complicated phenotype (odds ratio [OR] = 2.35 [1.31-4.22]; P = 0.004) and anti-TNF primary non-response (OR = 2.55 [1.27-5.12]; P = 0.008). We did not find any predictor of corticosteroid-free clinical remission in patients treated with vedolizumab. Vedolizumab was less effective than ustekinumab in patients >35 years old (OR = 0.41 [0.19-0.87]), with noncomplicated phenotype (OR=0.42 [0.18-0.96]), no prior bowel resection (OR = 0.49 [0.24-0.96]), and no steroids at baseline (OR=0.47 [0.23-0.97]). CONCLUSION: Ustekinumab was more effective to achieve early and long-term effectiveness than vedolizumab in Crohn's disease patients who previously failed response to anti-TNF agents.

Transmural healing and MRI healing are associated with lower risk of bowel damage progression than endoscopic mucosal healing in Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic mucosal healing is the current therapeutic target in Crohn's disease. However, transmural healing could lead to better outcomes. AIMS: To assess whether transmural healing or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) healing are better therapeutic targets than endoscopic mucosal healing to predict long-term improved outcome in Crohn's disease METHODS: From our MRI database, we retrospectively identified all Crohn's disease patients who had MRI and colonoscopy within a 3-month interval (median interval = 17.5 days). Four groups were considered: endoscopic mucosal healing (no ulceration or aphthoid erosion), MRI healing (no MRI signs of inflammation and no complication), transmural healing (combination of endoscopic and MRI healing) or no healing. Outcomes were time to surgery, bowel damage progression, hospitalisation, major outcomes (one of the three previous endpoints) and Crohn's disease-related drug discontinuation. Results were expressed in multivariable analyses adjusted on potential confounders (hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval]). RESULTS: Among 154 patients with Crohn's disease, 51.9% (80/154), 10.4% (16/154), 19.5% (30/154) and 18.2% (28/154) achieved no healing, endoscopic mucosal healing, MRI healing and transmural healing, respectively. Transmural healing (HR = 0.05 [0.00-0.40], P = 0.002) and MRI healing (HR = 0.09 [0.00-0.47], P = 0.005) were associated with lower risk of bowel damage progression than endoscopic mucosal healing. In addition, achieving transmural healing or MRI healing reduced the risk of experiencing major outcomes compared to endoscopic mucosal healing (HR = 0.28 [0.00-0.74], P = 0.01). Patients with transmural healing also had a decreased risk of relapse-related drug discontinuation (HR = 0.35 [0.13-0.95], P = 0.039) compared to those with endoscopic mucosal healing. CONCLUSION: Transmural healing and MRI healing are associated with lower risk of bowel damage progression than endoscopic mucosal healing and could be considered as better therapeutic targets in Crohn's disease.

Variation of faecal calprotectin level within the first three months after bowel resection is predictive of endoscopic postoperative recurrence in Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: Early prediction of postoperative recurrence (POR) remains a major concern in Crohn's disease (CD). AIMS: To assess serial faecal calprotectin (Fcal) monitoring within the first three months to predict CD endoscopic POR. METHODS: In a multicenter randomized controlled trial, CD patients received azathioprine 2.5 mg/kg/day with oral curcumin (3 g/day) or placebo. Fcal was measured at baseline, one month (M1) and M3. Endoscopic POR at M6 was defined as Rutgeerts' index ≥ i2b (central reading). RESULTS: Among the 48 patients included, there was no significant difference of median Fcal levels at baseline (p = 0.15), M1 (p = 0.44) and M3 (p = 0.28) between patients with or without endoscopic POR at M6. Fcal kinetics during the first 3 months after surgery was significantly different between the patients with or without POR at M6 (p = 0.021). The median variation between Fcal level at baseline and M3 (ΔFcal M3-M0) was significantly higher in patients with endoscopic POR compared to those without POR (p = 0.01). ΔFcal M3-M0 >+10% demonstrated the best performances to predict endoscopic POR at M6 (AUC=0.73, sensitivity=64.7%[41.1-82.7], specificity=87.5%[68.0-96.3], negative predictive value=77.8%[57.5-91.4] and positive predictive value=78.6%[49.2-95.3]). CONCLUSION: Fcal variation within the first three months after ileocolonic resection is a promising predictor of early endoscopic POR in CD patients.