Background and Aims. The impact of COVID-19 has been of great concern in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) worldwide, including an increased risk of severe outcomes and/or possible flare of IBD. This study aims to evaluate prevalence, outcomes, the impact of COVID-19 in patients with IBD, and risk factors associated with severe COVID-19 or flare of IBD activity. Methods. A consecutive cohort of IBD patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection and followed up at the McGill University Health Care Centre was obtained between March 1, 2020, and April 30, 2021. Demographics, comorbidities, IBD (type, treatments, pre- and post-COVID-19 clinical activity, biomarkers, and endoscopic activity), and COVID-19-related outcomes (pneumonia, hospitalization, death, and flare of IBD disease) were analyzed. Results. A cohort of 3,516 IBD patients was included. 82 patients (2.3%) were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection (median age: 39.0 (IQR 27.8–48.0), 77% with Crohn’s disease, 50% were female). The prevalence of COVID-19 infection in IBD patients was significantly lower compared to the general population in Canada and Quebec (3.5% versus 4.3%, p < 0.001 ). Severe COVID-19 occurred in 6 patients (7.3%); 2 patients (2.4%) died. A flare of IBD post-COVID-19 infection was reported in 8 patients (9.8%) within 3 months. Biologic therapy was held during active COVID-19 infection in 37% of patients. Age ≥55 years (odds ratio (OR): 11.1, 95% CI: 1.8–68.0), systemic corticosteroid use (OR: 4.6, 95% CI: 0.7–30.1), active IBD (OR: 3.8, 95% CI: 0.7–20.8), and comorbidity (OR: 4.9, 95% CI: 0.8–28.6) were factors associated with severe COVID-19. After initial infection, 61% of IBD patients received COVID-19 vaccinations. Conclusion. The prevalence of COVID-19 infection among patients with IBD was lower than that in the general population in Canada. Severe COVID-19, mortality, and flare of IBD were relatively rare, while a large proportion of patients received COVID-19 vaccination. Older age, comorbidities, active IBD disease, and systemic corticosteroid, but not immunosuppressive or biological therapy, were associated with severe COVID-19 infection.

Background and Aims. Tissue-invasive gastrointestinal cytomegalovirus (TI-GI CMV) disease is common in immunocompromised patients, but the increasing prevalence in immunocompetent patients has been reported. This study compared the clinical manifestations, endoscopic features, treatment outcomes, and predictors for inhospital mortality of TI-GI CMV between immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients. Methods. Patients with HIV infection, malignancy, or receiving immunosuppressive agents (chemotherapy, high dose, or long-term corticosteroids) were defined as the immunocompromised group. Demographic and inhospital mortality data were obtained and retrospectively analyzed. Results. A total of 213 patients (89 immunocompetent) with histologically confirmed TI-GI CMV were enrolled. Immunocompetent patients were older (70 vs. 52 years; p < 0.001 ), had more GI bleeding as a presenting symptom (47.2% vs. 29.0%; p = 0.010 ), and shorter symptom onset (2 vs. 14 days, p = 0.018 ). Concomitant extra-GI involvement was only seen in the immunocompromised group (6.5% vs. 0%; p = 0.02 ). Diffuse GI tract (14.5% vs. 4.5%; p = 0.032 ) and esophageal involvement (14.5% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.046 ) were more frequent in the immunocompromised, while small bowel involvement was more frequent in the immunocompetent group (19.1% vs. 8.1%; p = 0.029 ). An overall inhospital mortality was 27.7%. There was no significant difference in inhospital survival probability between the two groups (Peto-Peto test, p = 0.65 ). ICU admission (hazard ratio [HR] 7.21; 95% CI 2.55-20.36), sepsis or shock (HR 1.98; 95% CI 1.08-3.66), malnutrition (HR 2.62; 95% CI 1.05-7.01), and receiving chemotherapy (HR 5.2; 95% CI 1.89-14.29) were independent factors for inhospital mortality. Antiviral treatment for more than 14 days was the only protective factor to improve survival (Peto-Peto test, p < 0.001 ). Conclusions. Immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients with TI-GI CMV disease had distinct clinical and endoscopic characteristics. There was no significant difference in the inhospital mortality between the two groups. The factors for mortality were ICU admission, sepsis/shock, malnutrition, and receiving chemotherapy. Early diagnosis and initiation of antiviral treatment might improve the survival probability.

Background Data on external validation of models developed to distinguish Crohn’s disease (CD) from intestinal tuberculosis (ITB) are limited. This study aimed to validate and compare models using clinical, endoscopic, and/or pathology findings to differentiate CD from ITB. Methods Data from newly diagnosed ITB and CD patients were retrospectively collected from 5 centers located in Thailand or Hong Kong. The data was applied to Lee, et al., Makharia, et al., Jung, et al., and Limsrivilai, et al. model. Results Five hundred and thirty patients (383 CD, 147 ITB) with clinical and endoscopic data were included. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of Limsrivilai’s clinical-endoscopy (CE) model was 0.853, which was comparable to the value of 0.862 in Jung’s model (p = 0.52). Both models performed significantly better than Lee’s endoscopy model (AUROC: 0.713, p<0.01). Pathology was available for review in 199 patients (116 CD, 83 ITB). When 3 modalities were combined, Limsrivilai’s clinical-endoscopy-pathology (CEP) model performed significantly better (AUROC: 0.887) than Limsrivilai’s CE model (AUROC: 0.824, p = 0.01), Jung’s model (AUROC: 0.798, p = 0.005) and Makharia’s model (AUROC: 0.637, p<0.01). In 83 ITB patients, the rate of misdiagnosis with CD when used the proposed cutoff values in each original study was 9.6% for Limsrivilai’s CEP, 15.7% for Jung’s, and 66.3% for Makharia’s model. Conclusions Scoring systems with more parameters and diagnostic modalities performed better; however, application to clinical practice is still limited owing to high rate of misdiagnosis of ITB as CD. Models integrating more modalities such as imaging and serological tests are needed.

Amyloidosis of the gastrointestinal tract is an uncommon disorder characterized by the extracellular deposition of an abnormal fibrillar protein. It is rarely proven by biopsy. Amyloid deposition interferes with organ structure and its function. We report a case of a 64-year-old male who presented with severe colicky pain, unable to pass feces, and progressive abdominal distension for 2 days. Physical examination revealed marked abdominal distension, visible peristalsis, high-pitched hyperactive bowel sounds, and generalized tenderness. Plain abdominal radiograph showed markedly diffuse disproportional dilatation of the small bowel with different heights of air-fluid levels in the same loop. Abdominal computed tomography showed an evidence of small bowel obstruction, which revealed no gross mass or cause of obstruction, but long segment narrowing of the terminal ileum was seen. Ileocolonoscopy showed diffuse edematous mucosa of the ileum without mechanical obstruction but loss of normal bowel peristalsis. A random biopsy of the ileum was performed for pathological diagnosis, which reported extensive deposits of amorphous material within the muscle layers and in the submucosal vessels that stained strongly with Congo red and displayed the typical apple-green birefringence of amyloid protein when viewed under plane polarized light. Serum electrophoretic tests disclosed a monoclonal band of IgG-kappa monoclonal protein. His clinical symptoms improved after receiving chemotherapy with melphalan and prednisolone. Our case illustrated the rare cause of acute intestinal obstruction which mimicked a surgical condition. Primary intestinal amyloidosis should be in a differential diagnosis in patients without a demonstrated cause of obstruction.

Background and Aim Paralytic ileus is a common intestinal dysfunction in critically ill patients, which results in complications and poor hospital outcomes. There are still no established effective medications, except correcting the primary causes and prokinetics trial, which have limited efficacy and potential adverse events. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of prucalopride on paralytic ileus in critically ill patients. Methods A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial of five consecutive days treatment periods was conducted. Critically ill patients with paralytic ileus were included. The primary endpoint was the improvement of bowel dilatation on plain abdominal radiography. The secondary endpoint was the change of abdominal circumference. Results Twenty patients were consecutively enrolled in the study. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics of patients. The common causes of hospitalization were infection and respiratory problems. The maximum large bowel diameters dramatically decreased in prucalopride group and reached maximum point on the third day after intervention when compared with placebo (−2.1 [± 1.8] vs 0.3 [± 1.5] cm, P = 0.01). The maximum small bowel diameters were noticeably less decreased and were not significantly different when compared with placebo. The abdominal circumferences notably decreased and significantly diverged from placebo on the third day. Conclusions Prucalopride was an effective enterokinetic agent to improve non‐severe inflammatory/ischemic bowel conditions related paralytic ileus in critically ill patients. Its effect was predominant on large intestine but could not be well demonstrated on small bowel in this study. Future study or concomitant other prokinetics for upper gut motility should be further evaluated.

Primary hepatic angiosarcoma (PHA) is a rare mesenchymal liver tumor, accounting for 0.1-2% of primary liver malignancies. The clinical presentations of PHA are variable, from asymptomatic to liver failure or complicated with tumor rupture. The diagnosis of PHA is difficult due to the lack of specific clinical manifestation and investigation results, which can be confused with other liver tumors resulting in late diagnosis. However, there is currently a paucity of effective therapeutic approaches. We advocate early diagnosis with radiological imaging and histopathology because most of them are diagnosed in late-stage and carry a grave prognosis. Surgical resection remains the mainstay of treatment, which can significantly prolong survival. Chemotherapy, including transarterial chemoembolization, is an option for palliative treatment. Unfortunately, molecular treatment has limited efficacy and liver transplantation is also not recommended due to high rate of recurrence. We present a case series of four patients with biopsy-proven PHA which had distinct presentations and clinical courses.

BackgroundCapsule endoscopy (CE) is the preferred diagnostic test of choice in the investigation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). Although, a conservative strategy is recommended in the short-term, for cases with a negative result from CE, the impact of CE on long-term re-bleeding still remains unclear. Hence, the aim of this study was to determine the long-term re-bleeding rate along with predictors after CE in patients with OGIB.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 216 patients with OGIB, whom had received a CE examination, so as to investigate the cause of obscure GI bleeding; between July 2008 and March 2018. The patient’s characteristics, medication use, CE finding, treatments strategy, re-bleeding episodes and follow-up information were collected from the institutional electronic medical chart and CE database. Re-bleeding free survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves with log rank test, whilst predictors associated with the re-bleeding episodes were analyzed via the use of Cox proportional hazard model.ResultsOne hundred and thirty-three patients with OGIB, having received CE were enrolled in the analysis. The pool rate of re-bleeding was 26.3% (35/133) during a follow-up duration of 26 months after CE. Patients with positive CE study, without specific treatment, had higher rates of re-bleeding (47.6%) than those with positive study whom received specific treatment (25.7%), and negative study (20.8%) (p = 0.042). Although, the re-bleeding free survival was not significantly different among the groups (log rank test; P = 0.10). Re-bleeding events occurring within 6, 12, and 24 months after CE were 36, 64 and 92%, respectively. The high-frequency re-bleeding etiologies were the small bowel angiodysplasias and abnormal vascular lesions. Furthermore, independent predictors for re-bleeding after CE were patients with cirrhosis (hazard ratio, HR 4.06), incomplete CE visualization (HR 2.97), and a history of previous GI bleeding (HR 2.80).ConclusionsThe likelihood of re-bleeding after CE was higher in patients with positive CE study than those with negative study. Specific treatments, or therapeutic interventions for patients with detectable lesions reduced the probability of re-bleeding episodes in long-term follow-up. Close follow-up for recurrent bleeding is recommeded for at least 2 years after CE.

The main therapeutic goal of ulcerative colitis (UC) is to induce and maintain remission to prevent long-term disease progression. Treat-to-target strategies, first introduced by the STRIDE consensus and updated in 2021, have shifted focus from symptomatic control toward more stringent objective endpoints. Today, patient monitoring should be based on a combination of biomarkers and clinical scores, while patient-reported outcomes could be used as short-term targets in monitoring disease activity and therapeutic response. In addition, endoscopic healing was the preferred long-term goal in UC. A Mayo endoscopic score (MES) ≤ 1 can be recommended as a minimum target. However, recent evidence suggests that more stringent endoscopic goals (MES of 0) are associated with superior outcomes. Recently, emerging data support that histological remission (HR) is a superior prognostic factor to endoscopic healing in predicting long-term remission. Despite not yet being recommended as a target, HR may become an important potential therapeutic goal in UC. However, it remains questionable if histological healing should be used as a routine assessment in addition to clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic targets in all patients. Therefore, in this review, our aim was to discuss the current evidence for the different treatment targets and their value in everyday clinical practice.