[Topical therapy of ulcerative colitis]

The availability of new topical preparations for the treatment of left sided ulcerative colitis ulcerosa offers a therapy optimization for many patients. Rectal application of steroids and 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) is associated with fewer side effects and has a higher therapeutic efficacy in mild to moderate-active left-sided colitis as compared to a systemic therapy. Often it is argued that the patients' compliance is insufficient with a rectal therapy. However, with sufficient information on the proven advantages this is usually not the case. The rectal application of drugs in distal ulcerative colitis is suitable also for the maintenance of remission. Therefore the new therapy guidelines recommend topical therapy more than in former times. Subsequently, these manuscripts focussed specifically on the topical therapy of distal colitis, to elucidate that clear treatment advantages are present in daily practice.

Novel Nonbiologic Therapies for Ulcerative Colitis

An extensive array of compounds has been studied for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). The most frequently used nonbiologic drugs for the oral and intravenous treatment of ulcerative colitis include 5-aminosalicylate (5-ASA) drugs (mesalamine and derivatives), sulfasalazine, and other azo-bonded molecules of 5-ASA, steroids, calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine, tacrolimus, and sirolimus), thiopurines (azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine), and methotrexate, which are already presented in other sections of this book and are thus not considered in this chapter. The therapies presented in this section should be considered as potential alternatives, mostly for mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC). They are substances mostly used without FDA indications, such as heparin, nicotine, rosiglitazone, and N-acetylcysteine as well as “natural” compounds suggested to have anti-inflammatory or reparative properties, such as aloe vera, curcumin, short-chain fatty acids, and Bowman-Birk inhibitor

Prevalence and Risk Factors for Therapy Escalation in Ulcerative Colitis in the Swiss IBD Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND Physicians traditionally treat ulcerative colitis (UC) using a step-up approach. Given the paucity of data, we aimed to assess the cumulative probability of UC-related need for step-up therapy and to identify escalation-associated risk factors. METHODS Patients with UC enrolled into the Swiss IBD Cohort Study were analyzed. The following steps from the bottom to the top of the therapeutic pyramid were examined: (1) 5-aminosalicylic acid and/or rectal corticosteroids, (2) systemic corticosteroids, (3) immunomodulators (IM) (azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, methotrexate), (4) TNF antagonists, (5) calcineurin inhibitors, and (6) colectomy. RESULTS Data on 996 patients with UC with a median disease duration of 9 years were examined. The point estimates of cumulative use of different treatments at years 1, 5, 10, and 20 after UC diagnosis were 91%, 96%, 96%, and 97%, respectively, for 5-ASA and/or rectal corticosteroids, 63%, 69%, 72%, and 79%, respectively, for systemic corticosteroids, 43%, 57%, 59%, and 64%, respectively, for IM, 15%, 28%, and 35% (up to year 10 only), respectively, for TNF antagonists, 5%, 9%, 11%, and 12%, respectively, for calcineurin inhibitors, 1%, 5%, 9%, and 18%, respectively, for colectomy. The presence of extraintestinal manifestations and extended disease location (at least left-sided colitis) were identified as risk factors for step-up in therapy with systemic corticosteroids, IM, TNF antagonists, calcineurin inhibitors, and surgery. Cigarette smoking at diagnosis was protective against surgery. CONCLUSIONS The presence of extraintestinal manifestations, left-sided colitis, and extensive colitis/pancolitis at the time of diagnosis were associated with use of systemic corticosteroids, IM, TNF antagonists, calcineurin inhibitors, and colectomy during the disease course.

Increased level of antibodies cross-reacting with Ves v 5 and CRISP-2 in MAR-positive patients

Anti-sperm antibodies (ASA) have been described to be involved in immunological infertility. A possible antigen for ASA is the human cysteine-rich secretory protein 2 (CRISP-2), a sperm surface protein important in sperm-oocyte interaction. Furthermore, anti-CRISP-2 antibodies were shown to decrease fertility rates in vitro. Recently, we have reported cross-reacting antibodies recognizing CRISP-2 and antigen 5 from yellow jacket venom (Ves v 5) in human serum.

Interrelation of peri-operative morbidity and ASA class assignment in patients undergoing gynaecological surgery

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate intra- and post-operative risk using the American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) classification which is an important predictor of an intervention and of the entire operating programme. STUDY DESIGN: In this retrospective study, 4435 consecutive patients undergoing elective and emergency surgery at the Gynaecological Clinic of the University Hospital of Zurich were included. The ASA classification for pre-operative risk assessment was determined by an anaesthesiologist after a thorough physical examination. We observed several pre-, intra- and post-operative parameters, such as age, body-mass-index, duration of anaesthesia, duration of surgery, blood loss, duration of post-operative stay, complicated post-operative course, morbidity and mortality. The investigation of different risk factors was achieved by a multiple linear regression model for log-transformed duration of hospitalisation. RESULTS: Age and obesity were responsible for a higher ASA classification. ASA grade correlates with the duration of anaesthesia and the duration of the surgery itself. There was a significant difference in blood loss between ASA grades I (113+/-195 ml) and III (222+/-470 ml) and between classes II (176+/-432 ml) and III. The duration of post-operative hospitalisation could also be correlated with ASA class. ASA class I=1.7+/-3.0 days, ASA class II=3.6+/-4.3 days, ASA class III=6.8+/-8.2 days, and ASA class IV=6.2+/-3.9 days. The mean post-operative in-hospital stay was 2.5+/-4.0 days without complications, and 8.7+/-6.7 days with post-operative complications. Multiple linear regression model showed that not only the ASA classification contained an important information for the duration of hospitalisation. Parameters such as age, class of diagnosis, post-operative complications, etc. also have an influence on the duration of hospitalisation. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the ASA classification can be used as a good and early available predictor for the planning of an intervention in gynaecological surgery. The ASA classification helps the surgeon to assess the peri-operative risk profile of which important information can be derived for the planning of the operation programme.