[Hemorrhoidal disease in 2022 : how to select the most appropriate treatment ?] / Maladie hémorroïdaire en 2022 : comment choisir le traitement adapté ?

Hemorrhoidal disease is frequent and can lead to major alteration of quality of life. Conservative treatment, instrumental therapies and surgical approach play a complementary role in the management of hemorrhoidal disease. Understanding all techniques is mandatory to guide the patient and offer the best individualized treatment. Guidelines issued by scientific societies can facilitate the therapeutic decision.

La maladie hémorroïdaire est fréquente et ses répercussions sur la qualité de vie peuvent être majeures. Traitement conservateur, procédés non chirurgicaux et interventions chirurgicales jouent un rôle complémentaire dans le traitement d'une maladie hémorroïdaire symptomatique. Pour guider le patient et lui offrir la prise en charge la plus adaptée à sa situation, une connaissance des différents traitements est indispensable. Les recommandations des sociétés savantes, basées sur des avis d'experts, peuvent faciliter la décision thérapeutique.

Evolution of Hepatitis C Virus Treatment During the Era of Sofosbuvir-Based Therapies: A Real-World Experience in France.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) has been dramatically improved with the introduction of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs). Universal access to pangenotypic DAAs was provided in France from 2017, expanding the type of patients treated. Real-world studies are important to confirm effectiveness and safety in clinical practice, particularly in vulnerable populations. AIMS: To assess real-world effectiveness and safety of sofosbuvir-based therapy in adults with chronic HCV infection before and after universal access to DAAs in France. METHODS: This multicenter, non-interventional, prospective study assessed the effectiveness, safety, patient-reported outcomes and adherence with sofosbuvir-based regimens from October 2015 to July 2016 (Period 1: sofosbuvir-based therapy excluding sofosbuvir/velpatasvir) and from October 2017 to July 2018 (Period 2: pangenotypic sofosbuvir/velpatasvir-based therapy). RESULTS: Baseline data were documented for 1029 patients. Overall, 797 (77%) had sustained virologic response data available ≥ 9 weeks after treatment completion. Per protocol response was high (97%) irrespective of age, alcohol consumption, recreational drug use, or HIV/HCV coinfection. Adverse events occurred in approximately 25% of patients with the majority experiencing Grade 1 or 2 events. Sofosbuvir-based regimens improved health-related quality of life from baseline to end of treatment in patients with data at all timepoints. Overall, 99% of patients reported total or almost total adherence to therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Sofosbuvir-based therapy, including pangenotypic sofosbuvir/velpatasvir, is effective for the treatment of HCV in real-world clinical practice. This is an important step towards HCV elimination.

Sacro-coxxygial hygiene, a key factor in the outcome of pilonidal sinus surgical treatment?

BACKGROUND: Surgical wound infection contributes to prolonged recovery time after pilonidal sinus excision. As a standard procedure after surgery, we recommend our patients to perform water irrigations in the intergluteal cleft 4 to 6 times a day during the post-operative period. Our hypothesis is that this should reduce healing time and complication rates. The aim of this study was to measure the importance of sacro coccygeal hygiene in the management of pilonidal sinus disease. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data after surgical management of pilonidal sinus (sinusectomy procedures) in our division over a 10-year period. Patients were divided into three groups according to their local hygiene during postoperative follow-up and scored one (G1: good hygiene) to three (G3: poor hygiene). Primary outcome was complication rates. Secondary endpoints were, healing time, follow-up, time off work, and recurrence rate. RESULTS: In G1 (N = 112), complication rate was 3.6%. In G2 (N = 109), it was 5.5%, whereas in G3 (N = 71), it reached 7.03%. However, there were no statistically significant differences between hygiene groups regarding complication rates in both univariate and multivariable analysis. Regarding secondary outcomes, there were significant differences between hygiene groups concerning median follow-up (p = 0.0001) and median time off work (p = 0.0127). CONCLUSION: Good hygiene of wound is essential for optimal, rapid healing without complications. The importance of this report is to show that thanks to our hygiene follow-up strategy with frequent perineal irrigations and regular follow-up checks, patients with at a first glance "unclean local conditions", reached similar complications, median healing time and recurrences rates to patients with medium and good wound hygiene level.

Origin, HDV genotype and persistent viremia determine outcome and treatment response in patients with chronic hepatitis delta.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: HDV infection causes severe chronic liver disease in individuals infected with HBV. However, the factors associated with poor prognosis are largely unknown. Thus, we aimed to identify prognostic factors in patients with HDV infection. METHODS: The French National Reference Centre for HDV performed a nationwide retrospective study on 1,112 HDV-infected patients, collecting epidemiological, clinical, virological and histological data from the initial referral to the last recorded follow-up. RESULTS: The median age of our cohort was 36.5 (29.9-43.2) years and 68.6% of our cohort were male. Most patients whose birthplace was known were immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa (52.5%), southern and eastern Europe (21.3%), northern Africa and the Middle East (6.2%), Asia (5.9%) and South America (0.3%). Only 150 patients (13.8%) were French native. HDV load was positive in 659 of 748 tested patients (88.1%). HDV-1 was predominant (75.9%), followed by sub-Saharan genotypes: HDV-5 (17.6%), HDV-7 (2.9%), HDV-6 (1.8%) and HDV-8 (1.6%). At referral, 312 patients (28.2%) had cirrhosis, half having experienced at least 1 episode of hepatic decompensation. Cirrhosis was significantly less frequent in African than in European patients regardless of HDV genotype. At the end of follow-up (median 3.0 [0.8-7.2] years), 48.8% of the patients had developed cirrhosis, 24.2% had ≥1 episode(s) of decompensation and 9.2% had hepatocellular carcinoma. European HDV-1 and African HDV-5 patients were more at risk of developing cirrhosis. Persistent replicative HDV infection was associated with decompensation, hepatocellular carcinoma and death. African patients displayed better response to interferon therapy than non-African patients (46.4% vs. 29.1%, p <0.001). HDV viral load at baseline was significantly lower in responders than in non-responders. CONCLUSION: Place of birth, HDV genotype and persistent viremia constitute the main determinants of liver involvement and response to treatment in chronic HDV-infected patients. LAY SUMMARY: Chronic liver infection by hepatitis delta virus (HDV) is the most severe form of chronic viral hepatitis. Despite the fact that at least 15-20 million people are chronically infected by HDV worldwide, factors determining the severity of liver involvement are largely unknown. By investigating a large cohort of 1,112 HDV-infected patients followed-up in France, but coming from different areas of the world, we were able to determine that HDV genotype, place of birth (reflecting both viral and host-related factors) and persistent viremia constitute the main determinants of liver involvement and response to treatment.

Mucosal advancement flap for recurrent complex anal fistula: a repeatable procedure.

PURPOSE: Mucosal advancement flap (MAF) is the best option for complex anal fistula (AF) treatment. Recurrence is not rare and the best surgical option for his handling is a challenge considering the incontinence risk and the healing rate. We aimed to determine the feasibility and outcomes of a second MAF for recurrent complex AF previously treated with mucosal advancement flap. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 32 patients undergoing two or more MAF for recurrent AF in a larger cohort of 121 consecutive cases of MAF operated by the same senior colorectal surgeon. Only complex AF of cryptoglandular origin was enrolled. A long-term follow-up was performed collecting clinical and functional data. RESULTS: Among 121 patients (group A) treated with mucosal advancement flap, 32 (26.4%) (group B) recurred with a complex AF requiring a second mucosal advancement flap procedure. Success rate of group B is 78.1%. Six patients of group B recurred a second time, another MAF was performed with healing in all cases. Complication rate (Clavien Dindo 3b) of group B is 9.4% compared to 8.3% of group A. A slight continence deficit (Miller score 1, 2, and 4) was detected after the first MAF in 3 patients. The Miller score for these patients did not change after the subsequent MAF. CONCLUSIONS: MAF is effective for treatment of complex recurrent AF. A pre-existing MAF procedure does not worsen the healing rate of the second flap. The rate of surgical complications is similar with those reported in the literature for MAFs.

Correction to: Mucosal advancement flap for recurrent complex anal fistula: a repeatable procedure.

The name of the second author of this article was incorrectly presented as "Riccardo Scarpa Cosimo" this should have been "Cosimo Riccardo Scarpa".

Characterization of liver injury induced by cancer immunotherapy using immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Immunotherapy for metastatic cancer can be complicated by the onset of hepatic immune-related adverse events (IRAEs). This study compared hepatic IRAEs associated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/PD ligand 1 (PD-L1) and anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). METHODS: Among 536 patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 or CTLA-4 immunotherapies, 19 (3.5%) were referred to the liver unit for grade ≥3 hepatitis. Of these patients, nine had received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and seven had received anti-CTLA-4 mAbs, in monotherapy or in combination with anti-PD-1. Liver investigations were undertaken in these 16 patients, including viral assays, autoimmune tests and liver biopsy, histological review, and immunostaining of liver specimens. RESULTS: In the 16 patients included in this study, median age was 63 (range 33-84) years, and nine (56%) were female. Time between therapy initiation and hepatitis was five (range, 1-49) weeks and median number of immunotherapy injections was two (range, 1-36). No patients developed hepatic failure. Histology related to anti-CTLA-4 mAbs demonstrated granulomatous hepatitis including fibrin ring granulomas and central vein endotheliitis. Histology related to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs was characterised by lobular hepatitis. The management of hepatic IRAEs was tailored according to the severity of both the biology and histology of liver injury: six patients improved spontaneously; seven received oral corticosteroids at 0.5-1 mg/kg/day; two were maintained on 0.2 mg/kg/day corticosteroids; and one patient required pulses and 2.5 mg/kg/day of corticosteroids, and the addition of a second immunosuppressive drug. In three patients, immunotherapy was reintroduced without recurrence of liver dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Acute hepatitis resulting from immunotherapy for metastatic cancer is rare (3.5%) and, in most cases, not severe. Histological assessment can distinguish between anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and anti-CTLA-4 mAb toxicity. The severity of liver injury is helpful for tailoring patient management, which does not require systematic corticosteroid administration. LAY SUMMARY: Immunotherapy for metastatic cancer can be complicated by immune-related adverse events in the liver. In patients receiving immunotherapy for metastatic cancer who develop immune-mediated hepatitis, liver biopsy is helpful for the diagnosis and evaluation of the severity of liver injury. This study demonstrates the need for patient-oriented management, which could eventually avoid unnecessary systemic corticosteroid treatment.

The impact of treatment of hepatitis C with DAAs on the occurrence of HCC.

Hepatitis C virus infection is a major cause of chronic hepatitis resulting in cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The recent introduction of direct acting antivirals (DAA), results in sustained virological response (SVR) rates of >90% in treated patients whatever the stage of liver fibrosis with an excellent safety profile. This major advancement has allowed treatment of a larger number of patients, some with more advanced liver dysfunction and a higher risk of HCC. An SVR is associated with a reduced risk of hepatic decompensation, the need for liver transplantation and both liver-related and overall mortality. This high rate of SVR has raised hopes that there would be a significant reduction in the incidence of HCC. However, the impact of DAA-based regimens on the occurrence of HCC in patients with cirrhosis, and in particular the recurrence of HCC following successful curative treatment is controversial. Published studies suggest that DAA does not increase the risk of de novo HCC following SVR. A more controversial topic is the effect of a DAA-based SVR on the recurrence of HCC following curative treatment of early HCC. Well-designed studies with robust comparisons are needed to determine the effect of DAA on the recurrence of HCC. At present, patients with HCV cirrhosis who have undergone resection or ablation for HCC should not be dissuaded from receiving DAA therapy to prevent the progression of liver disease. Monitoring for HCC with liver imaging and AFP should be performed twice a year indefinitely post-SVR in patients with HCV cirrhosis.

News and challenges in the treatment of hepatitis C in liver transplantation.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the main causes of end-stage liver disease and indications for liver transplantation (LT) worldwide. HCV infection always recurs on the graft in patients who undergo LT with detectable serum HCV RNA, leading to cirrhosis in 20-30% within 5 years after transplantation. Achieving a sustained virological response (SVR) greatly improves patient and graft survival. Recently, the efficacy of therapy has radically changed and improved based on new direct acting antiviral agents (DAAs) without pegylated-interferon (PEG-IFN) and/or ribavirin (RBV), leading to SVR rates of more than 90% in transplanted patients. The safety profile in this population is also good, with limited drug-drug interactions. However, there are very few data on patients on the waiting list. Even when the results of combined DAAs are good (>80%), SVR rates are lower than in patients without cirrhosis. This review reports recent available data on the treatment of HCV infection in the transplant setting and discusses new dilemmas and challenges.

Effectiveness and Safety of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate in Chronic Hepatitis B: A 3-Year, Prospective, Real-World Study in France.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) demonstrated potent and sustainable antiviral efficacy and a good safety profile in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in controlled clinical trials. Real-world data are important to confirm effectiveness and safety data in patient populations encountered in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This non-interventional, prospective, 36-month study included treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients with CHB initiating their first TDF regimen (monotherapy or combination therapy) in routine clinical practice in France. Clinical, virologic, biochemical, compliance, and safety data were collected. RESULTS: Data from 440 consecutive patients from 58 centers were analyzed. The majority of the cohort was male (71 %), hepatitis B "e" antigen-negative (HBeAg-) (74 %), and treatment-experienced (56 %); 11 % were aged ≥65 years; and comorbidities were reported in 39 %. After 12 months, 92 % of the overall cohort achieved virologic response (HBV DNA <69 IU/mL) which was maintained to 36 months (96 %); virologic response was achieved by >90 % of patients irrespective of HBeAg status, age, or prior treatment history. At 36 months, 77 % of patients had normal alanine aminotransferase levels. Fourteen patients lost hepatis B surface (HBs) antigen, and seven seroconverted to anti-HBs. TDF was well tolerated over the 36-month study, including in 14 women who became pregnant during the study. Median estimated glomerular filtration rate did not change markedly from baseline irrespective of prior treatment history. CONCLUSIONS: TDF demonstrated potent virologic and biochemical responses across a broad range of patients reflective of routine clinical practice. The safety profile was consistent with results from pivotal trials.

Optimal therapy in hepatitis C virus liver transplant patients with direct acting antivirals.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) end stage liver disease is a main indication for liver transplantation (LT). Recurrent HCV always occurs when patients are transplanted with a detectable viral load, leading to cirrhosis in 20-30% of patients within 5 years. Achieving a sustained virological response (SVR) with antiviral treatment is the only way to improve patient and graft survival. Dual therapy based on pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PEG-IFN/RBV) was the standard of care for many years with limited efficacy and a poor safety profile. The addition of first generation NS3/4 protease inhibitors (PI) improved SVR rates from 30 to 50-60%. But the occurrence of serious adverse events and drug-drug interactions with calcineurin inhibitors have both been limiting factors for their use during LT. The preliminary results of the use of second generation direct acting antivirals (DAA) in transplant patients showed better efficacy with an SVR rate >70%. The pre- and post-transplantation safety profile is good. Although fewer drug-drug interactions are expected, some new DAA still interact with immunosuppressive drugs. Certain questions such as the use of RBV or the optimal duration of therapy have still not been resolved but should be answered by the many ongoing studies in the coming year.

Hepatitis E infection in patients with severe acute alcoholic hepatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection is a known cause of acute-on-chronic liver failure in developing countries, but its implication in Western countries remains unknown. HEV burden in the setting of severe acute alcoholic hepatitis (AAH) was assessed. METHODS: Patients admitted for severe AAH from 2007 to 2013, with available sera and histologically proven AAH, were included and managed according to current European guidelines. At admission, clinical and biological characteristics were collected; HEV serology and RNA detection were retrospectively performed. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were included. Mean age was 50.8 ± 9.6 years, 65.5% were male, 91.7% were cirrhotic and 33.3% presented with encephalopathy. Mean MELD and Maddrey scores were respectively 32.4 ± 11.4 and 73.3 ± 37. Liver biopsy showed mild, moderate and severe hepatitis in 25 (29.8%), 23 (27.4%) and 32 (38.1%) patients respectively. Steroids were given to 61 patients (72.6%) of whom 35 (57.4%) presented corticoresistance (mean Lille score: 0.78 ± 0.21). During hospitalization, 24 patients (28.6%) died and 11 (13.1%) were transplanted. Three patients (3.6%) presented markers of acute HEV infection and 21 (25%) markers of past HEV infection. Patient with acute infection were men, cirrhotic, and 2/3 presented with encephalopathy. Steroids were given to two patients without any response. The third patient died. None were transplanted. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients with severe AAH had markers of acute HEV infection, with similar clinical presentation and outcomes. Larger studies are needed to evaluate HEV impact on AAH management, resistance to steroids, and outcome.

Safety and efficacy of protease inhibitors to treat hepatitis C after liver transplantation: a multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Protease inhibitors (PI) with peginterferon/ribavirin have significantly improved SVR rates in HCV G1 patients. Their use to treat HCV recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) is a challenge. METHODS: This cohort study included 37 liver transplant recipients (male, 92%, age 57 ± 11 years), treated with boceprevir (n=18) or telaprevir (n=19). The indication for therapy was HCV recurrence (fibrosis stage ≥F2 (n=31, 83%) or fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (n=6, 16%). RESULTS: Eighteen patients were treatment-naive, five were relapsers and fourteen were non-responders to dual therapy after LT. Twenty-two patients received cyclosporine and fifteen tacrolimus. After 12 weeks of PI therapy, a complete virological response was obtained in 89% of patients treated with boceprevir, and 58% with telaprevir (p=0.06). The end of treatment virological response rate was 72% (13/18) in the boceprevir group and 40% (4/10) in the telaprevir group (p=0.125). A sustained virological response 12 weeks after treatment discontinuation was observed in 20% (1/5) and 71% (5/7) of patients in the telaprevir and boceprevir groups, respectively (p=0.24). Treatment was discontinued in sixteen patients (treatment failures (n=11), adverse events (n=5)). Infections occurred in ten patients (27%), with three fatal outcomes (8%). The most common adverse effect was anemia (n=34, 92%), treated with erythropoietin and/or a ribavirin dose reduction; thirteen patients (35%) received red blood cell transfusions. The cyclosporine dose was reduced by 1.8 ± 1.1-fold and 3.4 ± 1.0-fold with boceprevir and telaprevir, respectively. The tacrolimus dose was reduced by 5.2 ± 1.5-fold with boceprevir and 23.8±18.2-fold with telaprevir. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that triple therapy is effective in LT recipients, particularly those experiencing a severe recurrence. The occurrence of anemia and drug-drug interactions, and the risk of infections require close monitoring.

Immunoproteomic analysis of potentially severe non-graft-versus-host disease hepatitis after allogenic bone marrow transplantation.

UNLABELLED: The development of potentially severe non-graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) hepatitis resembling autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) has been reported after bone marrow transplantation (BMT). The aim of this study was to better characterize this form of hepatitis, particularly through the identification of autoantigens recognized by patient sera. Five patients who received an allogeneic BMT for the treatment of hematological diseases developed liver dysfunction with histological features suggestive of AIH. Before and during the onset of hepatic dysfunction, sera were tested on immunoblottings performed with cytosolic, microsomal, mitochondrial, and nuclear proteins from rat liver homogenate and resolved by two-dimensional electrophoresis. Antigenic targets were identified by mass spectrometry. During the year that followed BMT, all patients presented with GVHD. Acute hepatitis then occurred after the withdrawal, or during the tapering, of immunosuppressive therapy. At that time, no patients had a history of liver toxic drug absorption, patent viral infection, or any histopathological findings consistent with GVHD. Immunoreactive spots stained by sera collected at the time of hepatic dysfunction were more numerous and more intensely expressed than those stained by sera collected before. Considerable patient-dependent pattern heterogeneity was observed. Among the 259 spots stained exclusively by sera collected at the time of hepatitis, a total of 240 spots were identified, corresponding to 103 different proteins. Twelve of them were recognized by sera from 3 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first immunological description of potentially severe non-GVHD hepatitis occurring after BMT, determined using a proteomic approach and enabling a discussion of the mechanisms that transform an alloimmune reaction into an autoimmune response. Any decision to withdraw immunosuppression after allogeneic BMT should be made with caution.

Management of HCV transplant patients with triple therapy.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the leading causes of end-stage liver disease and the main indication for liver transplantation (LT) in most countries. All patients who undergo LT with detectable serum HCV RNA experience graft reinfection. Between 20 and 30% of patients have developed cirrhosis at 5 years post-LT. The outcome of transplant patients with cirrhosis on the graft is severe, with a rate of decompensation at 1 year of approximately 40%. To date, retransplantation is the only option in patients with decompensated liver disease. Until 2011, standard antiviral therapy with pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV), was the only effective therapy. Obtaining a sustained virological response (SVR) in patients with LT greatly improves overall and graft survival but this only occurs in 30% of transplanted patients. Direct acting antivirals (DAAs) such as protease inhibitors (PI), polymerase or other non-structural proteins inhibitors represent a new era in HCV associated liver disease. Although their use in the field of LT will certainly be essential there are some limitations because of safety and tolerance. One limitation is the potential interaction with calcineurin inhibitors. We describe the results of triple therapy with boceprevir (BOC) or telaprevir (TVR) for efficacy and safety and comment on future therapeutic strategies in liver transplant recipients.

Prevention of hepatitis B virus reinfection in liver transplant recipients.

Antiviral therapy using newer nucleos(t)ide analogues with lower resistance rates such as entecavir or tenofovir could suppress hepatitis B virus (HBV) replication, improve liver function, delay or obviate the need for liver transplantation in some patients, and reduce the risk of HBV recurrence. The combination of long-term antiviral and low-dose hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) can effectively prevent HBV recurrence in more than 90% of transplant recipients. Some form of HBV prophylaxis needs be continued indefinitely after transplantation. However, in patients with a low risk of HBV recurrence (i.e. HBV DNA levels undetectable before transplantation), it is possible to discontinue HBIG and maintain long-term antiviral therapy. A more cautious approach to prophylaxis regimen is necessary for those patients with high pretransplant HBV DNA levels, those with limited antiviral options if HBV recurrence occurs (i.e. HIV or HDV coinfection, preexisting drug resistance), those with a high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence, and those with a risk of noncompliance to antiviral therapy.