FMT by a single colonoscopic donor stool application is not effective in inducing remission in chronic active therapy-refractory UC. Changes in the composition of the intestinal microbiota were significant and resulted in a partial improvement of UC-associated dysbiosis. The results suggest that dysbiosis in UC is at least in part a secondary phenomenon induced by inflammation and diarrhea rather than being causative for inflammation in this disease.

SummaryBackgroundFaecal microbiota transplantation is an experimental approach for the treatment of patients with ulcerative colitis. Although there is growing evidence that faecal microbiota transplantation is effective in this disease, factors affecting its response are unknown.AimsTo establish a faecal microbiota transplantation treatment protocol in ulcerative colitis patients, and to investigate which patient or donor factors are responsible for the treatment success.MethodsThis is an open controlled trial of repeated faecal microbiota transplantation after antibiotic pre‐treatment (FMT‐group, n = 17) vs antibiotic pre‐treatment only (AB‐group, n = 10) in 27 therapy refractory ulcerative colitis patients over 90 days. Faecal samples of donors and patients were analysed by 16SrRNA gene‐based microbiota analysis.ResultsIn the FMT‐group, 10/17 (59%) of patients showed a response and 4/17 (24%) a remission to faecal microbiota transplantation. Response to faecal microbiota transplantation was mainly influenced by the taxonomic composition of the donor's microbiota. Stool of donors with a high bacterial richness (observed species remission 946 ± 93 vs no response 797 ± 181 at 15367 rps) and a high relative abundance of Akkermansia muciniphila (3.3 ± 3.1% vs 0.1 ± 0.2%), unclassified Ruminococcaceae (13.8 ± 5.0% vs 7.5 ± 3.7%), and Ruminococcus spp. (4.9 ± 3.5% vs 1.0 ± 0.7%) were more likely to induce remission. In contrast antibiotic treatment alone (AB‐group) was poorly tolerated, probably because of a sustained decrease of intestinal microbial richness.ConclusionsThe taxonomic composition of the donor's intestinal microbiota is a major factor influencing the efficacy of faecal microbiota transplantation in ulcerative colitis patients. The design of specific microbial preparation might lead to new treatments for ulcerative colitis.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective The aim of the study was to compare azathioprine versus mesalazine tablets for the prevention of clinical recurrence in patients with postoperative Crohn's disease (CD) with moderate or severe endoscopic recurrence. Methods This was a 1 year, double-blind, doubledummy, randomised study which took place in 21 gastroenterology centres in Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany and Israel. The study participants were 78 adults with CD who had undergone resection with ileocolonic anastomosis in the preceding 6e24 months without subsequent clinical recurrence and with a Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI) score <200, but with moderate or severe endoscopic recurrence. The study drugs were azathioprine 2.0e2.5 mg/kg/day or mesalazine 4 g/day over 1 year. The primary end point was therapeutic failure during 1 year, defined as a CDAI score $200 and an increase of $60 points from baseline, or study drug discontinuation due to lack of efficacy or intolerable adverse drug reaction. Results Treatment failure occurred in 22.0% (9/41) of azathioprine-treated patients and 10.8% (4/37) of mesalazine-treated patients, a difference of 11.1% (95% CI À5.0% to 27.3%, p¼0.19). Clinical recurrence was significantly less frequent with azathioprine versus mesalazine (0/41 (0%) vs 4/37 (10.8%), p¼0.031), whereas study drug discontinuation due to adverse drug reactions only occurred in azathioprine-treated patients (9/41 (22.0%) vs 0%, p¼0.002). The proportion of patients showing $1 point reduction in Rutgeerts score between baseline and month 12 was 63.3% (19/30) and 34.4% (11/32) in the azathioprine and mesalazine groups, respectively (p¼0.023). Conclusions In this population of patients with postoperative CD at high risk of clinical recurrence, superiority for azathioprine versus mesalazine could not be demonstrated for therapeutic failure. Clinical trial registration number NCT00946946.

Infliximab (IFX) has tremendously enriched the therapy of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) and other immune mediated diseases. Although the efficacy of IFX was undoubtedly proven during the last decade numerous publications have also caused various safety concerns. To summarize the immense information concerning adverse events and safety issues the Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology launched this evidence based consensus on the safe use of IFX which covers the following topics: infusion reactions and immunogenicity, skin reactions, opportunistic infections (including tuberculosis), non-opportunistic infections (bacterial and viral), vaccination, neurological complications, hepatotoxicity, congestive heart failure, haematological side effects, intestinal strictures, stenosis and bowel obstruction (SSO), concomitant medication, malignancy and lymphoma, IFX in the elderly and the young, mortality, fertility, pregnancy and breast feeding. To make the vast amount of information practicable for routine application the consensus was finally condensed into a checklist for a safe use of IFX which consists of two parts: issues to be addressed prior to anti-TNF therapy and issues to be addressed during maintenance. Both parts are further divided into obligatory and facultative items.

IFX and ADA appear comparable in clinical outcomes for patients with Crohn's disease who are naïve to TNFα antagonists.

VTE is frequent in IBD patients. Most of them are unprovoked and occur in outpatients. DVT and PE are most common and unusual sites of thrombosis are rare.