T. Voiosu, Andreea Benguş, P. Bălănescu, Roxana Dinu, A. Voiosu, C. Băicuş and B. Mateescu
Background and Aims. Serum and fecal biomarkers have been used as noninvasive methods for assessing disease activity in ulcerative colitis. C-reactive protein, serum tumor necrosis factor-α and fecal calprotectin are among the most promising such biomarkers. However, their role in the management of ulcerative colitis patients remains to be clarified. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of C-reactive protein, fecal calprotectin and tumor necrosis factor-α in detecting clinical and endoscopic activity and predicting disease outcome.
Methods. A cohort of ulcerative colitis patients was prospectively evaluated for clinical and endoscopic disease activity using the Mayo score. Serum C-reactive protein and tumor necrosis factor-α levels were measured and a point-of-care method was used for determining Calprotectin levels.
Results. Fifty-three patients with ulcerative colitis were followed for a median of 12 months. Fecal calprotectin and C-reactive protein levels were significantly higher in patients with clinically active disease at baseline, but only calprotectin levels correlated with endoscopic activity. Calprotectin values over 300 μg/g had 60% sensitivity and 90% specificity for detecting active endoscopic disease and 61% sensitivity and 89% specificity for predicting mucosal healing.
Conclusion. Rapid calprotectin testing is a better predictor of mucosal healing than serum biomarkers and it could improve the management of ulcerative colitis patients by decreasing the need for invasive investigations.
T. Voiosu, Alina Tanţău, A. Voiosu, Andreea Benguş, Cristina Mocanu, Bianca Smarandache, C. Baicuş, Ioana Vişovan and B. Mateescu
Background. Optimal bowel preparation is one of the most important factors affecting the quality of colonoscopy. Several patient-related factors are known to influence the quality of bowel cleansing but randomized trials in this area are lacking. We aimed to compare an individualized bowel prep strategy based on patient characteristics to a standard preparation regimen.
Material and Methods. We conducted an endoscopist-blinded multicenter randomized control-trial. The Boston Bowel Prep Score (BBPS) was used to assess quality of bowel preparation and a 10 point visual analogue scale to assess patient comfort during bowel prep. Patients were randomised to either the standard regimens of split-dose 4L polyethylene-glycol (group A), split-dose sodium picosulphate/magnesium citrate (group B) or to either of the two depending on their responses to a 3-item questionnaire (individualized preparation, group C).
Results. 185 patients were randomized during the study period and 143 patients were included in the final analysis. Patients in the individualized group had a median BBPS of 7 compared to a median of 6 in the standard group (p = 0.7). Also, there was no significant difference in patients’ comfort scores, irrespective of study group or laxative regimen. However, on multivariable analysis, a split-dose 4L polyethylene-glycol was an independent predictor for achieving a BBPS>6 (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.4-9.8), regardless of patient-related factors.
Conclusion. The choice of laxative seems to be more important than patient-related factors in predicting bowel cleansing. Comfort during bowel prep is not influenced by the type of strategy used.