Mater Dei Hospital

This new diagnostic consensus guideline is a joint project of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology [ESGAR] that now merges the former ECCO-ESGAR Imaging Guideline and the former ECCO Endoscopy Guideline, also including laboratory parameters. It has been drafted by 30 ECCO and ESGAR members from 17 European countries. All the authors recognize th e work of and are grateful to previous ECCO and ESGAR members who contributed tocreating the earlier consensus guidelines on imaging and endoscopy. The former guidelines have been condensed into this new diagnostic consensus guideline which consists of two papers: the first detailing assessment at initial diagnosis, to monitor treat ment and for the detection of complications; the second dealing with the available scoring systems and general considerations regarding the different diagnostic tools. The strategy to define consensus was similar to that previously described in other ECCO consensus guidelines [available at www.ecco-ibd.eu]. Briefly, an open call for participants was made, with ECCO participants selected by the Guidelines’ Committee of ECCO [known as GuiCom] on the basis of their publication record and a personal statement and ESGAR participants nominated by ESGAR. The following working parties were established: diagnostics at initial diagnosis, diagnostics for monitoring treatment in patients with known IBD, diagnostics for the detect ion of complications, scores for IBD, and general principles and technical aspects. Provisional guideline statements and supporting text were written following a comprehensive literature review, then refined following two voting rounds. The first voting round introduced a more comprehensive voting procedure, in which each Guidelines participants voted on all statements by explicitly reviewing those statements together with their respective supporting text and references. The second voting round included optional national representative participation of ECCO’s 36 member countries and ESGAR’s 28 member countries. The level of evidence was graded according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine [www.cebm.net]. The ECCO statements were finalized by the authors at a face-to-face meeting in Barcelona in October 2017 and represent consensus with agreement of at least 80% of the present participants. Consensus statements are intended to be read in context with their qualifying comments and not in isolation. The supporting text was then finalised under the direction of each working group leader [SV, TK, GF, VA, EC], before being integrated by the consensus leaders [CM, JS, AS].

Crohn’s disease [CD] is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] that can result in progressive bowel damage and disability1. CD can affect individuals of any age, from children to the elderly, 2, 3 and may cause significant morbidity and impact on quality of life. Up to one-third of patients present with complicated behaviour [strictures, fistula, or abscesses] at diagnosis4. Most patients over time will develop a complication, with roughly 50% of patients requiring surgery within 10 years of diagnosis5-7. As the precise aetiology of CD remains unknown, a curative therapy is not yet available8. Several agents are available for the medical treatment of CD. Medical agents include mesalazine [5-ASA], locally active steroids [such as budesonide], systemic steroids, thiopurines such as azathioprine [AZA] and mercaptopurine [MP], methotrexate [MTX], and biological therapies [such as anti-TNF, anti-integrins, and anti-IL12/23]. \nThe European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] produces and regularly updates several guidelines aimed at providing evidence-based guidance on critical aspects of IBD care to all healthcare professionals who manage patients with IBD. To provide high-quality evidence-based recommendations on medical and surgical treatment in CD, ECCO decided to develop these guidelines by adopting the GRADE [Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation] approach9. GRADE is a systematic process for developing guidelines that addresses how to frame the healthcare questions, summarize the evidence, ..

This update and revision of the international guideline for urticaria was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA²LEN) and its Urticaria and Angioedema Centers of Reference and Excellence (UCAREs and ACAREs), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF; EuroGuiDerm), and the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology with the participation of 64 delegates of 50 national and international societies and from 31 countries. The consensus conference was held on 3 December 2020. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease that presents with wheals, angioedema, or both. The lifetime prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous or inducible urticaria is disabling, impairs quality of life, and affects performance at work and school. This updated version of the international guideline for urticaria covers the definition and classification of urticaria and outlines expert-guided and evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria.

This article is the second in a series of two publications relating to the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] evidence-based consensus on the management of Crohn's disease. The first article covers medical management; the present article addresses surgical management, including preoperative aspects and drug management before surgery. It also provides technical advice for a variety of common clinical situations. Both articles together represent the evidence-based recommendations of the ECCO for Crohn's disease and an update of previous guidelines.

Ulcerative colitis [UC] is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] characterised by colonic inflammation extending to a variable extent from the rectum. Care of the patient with UC requires appropriate input from across the multiprofessional team. These guidelines summarise the recommended medical treatment for adults with UC. Other ECCO guidelines consider the approach to UC diagnosis and monitoring, nursing care, management of disease complications, risk of infection, and technical aspects of surgery. This document was prepared as part of a process that also led to the publication of a related guideline with recommendations on the surgical care of the patients with UC and on the medical aspects of the management of the patient hospitalised with severe UC. ECCO Guidelines on Therapeutics in Ulcerative Colitis: Surgical Treatment. Patients living with UC can have a variable disease course. In this document, we discuss therapeutic approaches stratified by disease severity [mildly-to-moderately active and moderately-to-severely active disease]. Attempts to define disease severity are widely used in setting clinical trial inclusion criteria and can be measured according to several different definitions. Trial populations will inevitably vary, and we reflect the continuum of disease severity by having the moderate disease category span both broad categories. It is also important to remember that these definitions capture severity at a given point in time and may not reflect the cumulative long-term burden of disease experienced by a patient. It is also important to consider disease extent when planning treatment in UC, as this may affect the optimal route of drug administration. This is typically defined according to disease involving the rectum only [proctitis], disease distal to the splenic flexure [left-sided UC], or disease extending proximal to the splenic flexure [extensive UC]. These definitions of disease extent are recognised as somewhat arbitrary; in clinical practice, topically administered therapies are often used for UC whose extent is limited to the rectum and a portion of the sigmoid colon [proctosigmoiditis], with the term ‘distal colitis’ used to describe this disease distribution. It should be remembered that disease distribution can change and that proximal disease extension can be a negative prognostic marker.

In recent years, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) have become a truly global challenge. In addition to the long-known healthcare-associated clones, novel strains have also emerged outside of the hospital settings, in the community as well as in livestock. The emergence and spread of virulent clones expressing Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL) is an additional cause for concern. In order to provide an overview of pandemic, epidemic and sporadic strains, more than 3,000 clinical and veterinary isolates of MRSA mainly from Germany, the United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Malta, Abu Dhabi, Hong Kong, Australia, Trinidad & Tobago as well as some reference strains from the United States have been genotyped by DNA microarray analysis. This technique allowed the assignment of the MRSA isolates to 34 distinct lineages which can be clearly defined based on non-mobile genes. The results were in accordance with data from multilocus sequence typing. More than 100 different strains were distinguished based on affiliation to these lineages, SCCmec type and the presence or absence of PVL. These strains are described here mainly with regard to clinically relevant antimicrobial resistance- and virulence-associated markers, but also in relation to epidemiology and geographic distribution. The findings of the study show a high level of biodiversity among MRSA, especially among strains harbouring SCCmec IV and V elements. The data also indicate a high rate of genetic recombination in MRSA involving SCC elements, bacteriophages or other mobile genetic elements and large-scale chromosomal replacements.

A standardised methodology for a combined point prevalence survey (PPS) on healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and antimicrobial use in European acute care hospitals developed by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control was piloted across Europe. Variables were collected at national, hospital and patient level in 66 hospitals from 23 countries. A patient-based and a unit-based protocol were available. Feasibility was assessed via national and hospital questionnaires. Of 19,888 surveyed patients, 7.1% had an HAI and 34.6% were receiving at least one antimicrobial agent. Prevalence results were highest in intensive care units, with 28.1% patients with HAI, and 61.4% patients with antimicrobial use. Pneumonia and other lower respiratory tract infections (2.0% of patients; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8–2.2%) represented the most common type (25.7%) of HAI. Surgical prophylaxis was the indication for 17.3% of used antimicrobials and exceeded one day in 60.7% of cases. Risk factors in the patient-based protocol were provided for 98% or more of the included patients and all were independently associated with both presence of HAI and receiving an antimicrobial agent. The patient-based protocol required more work than the unit-based protocol, but allowed collecting detailed data and analysis of risk factors for HAI and antimicrobial use.

BACKGROUND: The Global Point Prevalence Survey (Global-PPS) established an international network of hospitals to measure antimicrobial prescribing and resistance worldwide. We aimed to assess antimicrobial prescribing and resistance in hospital inpatients. METHODS: We used a standardised surveillance method to collect detailed data about antimicrobial prescribing and resistance from hospitals worldwide, which were grouped by UN region. The internet-based survey included all inpatients (adults, children, and neonates) receiving an antimicrobial who were on the ward at 0800 h on one specific day between January and September, 2015. Hospitals were classified as primary, secondary, tertiary (including infectious diseases hospitals), and paediatric hospitals. Five main ward types were defined: medical wards, surgical wards, intensive-care units, haematology oncology wards, and medical transplantation (bone marrow or solid transplants) wards. Data recorded included patient characteristics, antimicrobials received, diagnosis, therapeutic indication according to predefined lists, and markers of prescribing quality (eg, whether a stop or review date were recorded, and whether local prescribing guidelines existed and were adhered to). We report findings for adult inpatients. FINDINGS: The Global-PPS for 2015 included adult data from 303 hospitals in 53 countries, including eight lower-middle-income and 17 upper-middle-income countries. 86 776 inpatients were admitted to 3315 adult wards, of whom 29 891 (34·4%) received at least one antimicrobial. 41 213 antimicrobial prescriptions were issued, of which 36 792 (89·3%) were antibacterial agents for systemic use. The top three antibiotics prescribed worldwide were penicillins with β-lactamase inhibitors, third-generation cephalosporins, and fluoroquinolones. Carbapenems were most frequently prescribed in Latin America and west and central Asia. Of patients who received at least one antimicrobial, 5926 (19·8%) received a targeted antibacterial treatment for systemic use, and 1769 (5·9%) received a treatment targeting at least one multidrug-resistant organism. The frequency of health-care-associated infections was highest in Latin America (1518 [11·9%]) and east and south Asia (5363 [10·1%]). Overall, the reason for treatment was recorded in 31 694 (76·9%) of antimicrobial prescriptions, and a stop or review date in 15 778 (38·3%). Local antibiotic guidelines were missing for 7050 (19·2%) of the 36 792 antibiotic prescriptions, and guideline compliance was 77·4%. INTERPRETATION: The Global-PPS showed that worldwide surveillance can be accomplished with voluntary participation. It provided quantifiable measures to assess and compare the quantity and quality of antibiotic prescribing and resistance in hospital patients worldwide. These data will help to improve the quality of antibiotic prescribing through education and practice changes, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries that have no tools to monitor antibiotic prescribing in hospitals. FUNDING: bioMérieux.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the European trends and developments in ART and IUI in 2014 as compared to previous years? SUMMARY ANSWER: The 18th ESHRE report on ART shows a continuing expansion of both treatment numbers in Europe and more variability in treatment modalities resulting in a rising contribution to the birth rates in most participating countries. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Since 1997, ART data generated by national registries have been collected, analysed by the European IVF-monitoring (EIM) Consortium and reported in 17 manuscripts published in Human Reproduction. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Continuous collection of European data by the EIM for ESHRE. The data for treatments performed in 2014 between 1 January and 31 December in 39 European countries were provided by national registries or on a voluntary basis by clinics or professional societies. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: From 39 countries and 1279 institutions offering ART services, a total of 776 556 treatment cycles, involving 146 148 with IVF, 362 285 with ICSI, 192 027 with frozen embryo replacement (FER), 15 894 with PGT, 56 516 with egg donation (ED), 292 with IVM and 3404 with frozen oocyte replacement (FOR) were reported. European data on IUI using husband/partner's semen (IUI-H) and donor semen (IUI-D) were reported from 1364 institutions offering IUI in 26 countries and 21 countries, respectively. A total of 120 789 treatments with IUI-H and 49 163 treatments with IUI-D were included. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In 14 countries (17 in 2013), where all institutions contributed to their respective national registers, a total of 291 235 treatment cycles were performed in a population of ~208 million inhabitants, corresponding to 1925 cycles per million inhabitants (range: 423-2978 per million inhabitants). After treatment with IVF the clinical pregnancy rates (PR) per aspiration and per transfer were marginally higher in 2014 than in 2013, at 29.9 and 35.8% versus 29.6 and 34.5%, respectively. After treatment with ICSI the PR per aspiration and per transfer were also higher than those achieved in 2013 (28.4 and 35.0% versus 27.8 and 32.9%, respectively). After FER with own embryos the PR continued to rise, from 27.0% in 2013 to 27.6% in 2014. After ED a similar trend was observed with PR reaching 50.3% per fresh transfer (49.8% in 2013) and 48.7% for FOR (46.4% in 2013). The delivery rates (DR) after IUI remained stable at 8.5% after IUI-H (8.6% in 2013) and at 11.6% after IUI-D (11.1% in 2013). In IVF and ICSI together, 1, 2, 3 and ≥4 embryos were transferred in 34.9, 54.5, 9.9 and in 0.7% of all treatments, respectively (corresponding to 31.4%, 56.3, 11.5% and 1% in 2013). This evolution in embryo transfer strategy in both IVF and ICSI resulted in a singleton, twin and triplet DR of 82.5, 17.0 and 0.5%, respectively (compared to 82.0, 17.5 and 0.5%, respectively, in 2013). Treatments with FER in 2014 resulted in a twin and triplet DR of 12.4 and 0.3%, respectively (versus 12.5 and 0.3% in 2013). Twin and triplet DR after IUI were 9.5 and 0.3%, respectively, after IUI-H (in 2013:9.5 and 0.6%) and 7.7 and 0.3% after IUI-D (in 2013: 7.5 and 0.3%). LIMITATION, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The method of data collection and reporting varies among European countries. The EIM receives aggregated data from various countries with variable levels of completeness. Registries from a number of countries have failed to provide adequate data about the number of initiated cycles and deliveries. As long as incomplete data are provided, the results should be interpreted with caution. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The 18th ESHRE report on ART shows a continuing expansion of treatment numbers in Europe. The number of treatments reported, the variability in treatment modalities and the rising contribution to the birth rates in most participating countries point towards the increasing impact of ART on reproduction in Europe. Being the largest data collection on ART, the report gives detailed information about ongoing developments in the field. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study has no external funding and all costs are covered by ESHRE. There are no competing interests.

Aicardi-Goutières syndrome is an inflammatory disease occurring due to mutations in any of TREX1, RNASEH2A, RNASEH2B, RNASEH2C, SAMHD1, ADAR or IFIH1. We report on 374 patients from 299 families with mutations in these seven genes. Most patients conformed to one of two fairly stereotyped clinical profiles; either exhibiting an in utero disease-onset (74 patients; 22.8% of all patients where data were available), or a post-natal presentation, usually within the first year of life (223 patients; 68.6%), characterized by a sub-acute encephalopathy and a loss of previously acquired skills. Other clinically distinct phenotypes were also observed; particularly, bilateral striatal necrosis (13 patients; 3.6%) and non-syndromic spastic paraparesis (12 patients; 3.4%). We recorded 69 deaths (19.3% of patients with follow-up data). Of 285 patients for whom data were available, 210 (73.7%) were profoundly disabled, with no useful motor, speech and intellectual function. Chilblains, glaucoma, hypothyroidism, cardiomyopathy, intracerebral vasculitis, peripheral neuropathy, bowel inflammation and systemic lupus erythematosus were seen frequently enough to be confirmed as real associations with the Aicardi-Goutieres syndrome phenotype. We observed a robust relationship between mutations in all seven genes with increased type I interferon activity in cerebrospinal fluid and serum, and the increased expression of interferon-stimulated gene transcripts in peripheral blood. We recorded a positive correlation between the level of cerebrospinal fluid interferon activity assayed within one year of disease presentation and the degree of subsequent disability. Interferon-stimulated gene transcripts remained high in most patients, indicating an ongoing disease process. On the basis of substantial morbidity and mortality, our data highlight the urgent need to define coherent treatment strategies for the phenotypes associated with mutations in the Aicardi-Goutières syndrome-related genes. Our findings also make it clear that a window of therapeutic opportunity exists relevant to the majority of affected patients and indicate that the assessment of type I interferon activity might serve as a useful biomarker in future clinical trials.

This is the second of a series of two articles reporting the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] evidence-based consensus on the management of adult patients with ulcerative colitis [UC]. The first article is focused on medical management, and the present article addresses medical treatment of acute severe ulcerative colitis [ASUC] and surgical management of medically refractory UC patients, including preoperative optimisation, surgical strategies, and technical issues. The article provides advice for a variety of common clinical and surgical conditions. Together, the articles represent an update of the evidence-based recommendations of the ECCO for UC.

This Consensus Statement summarizes recommendations for clinical diagnosis, investigation and management of patients with Silver-Russell syndrome (SRS), an imprinting disorder that causes prenatal and postnatal growth retardation. Considerable overlap exists between the care of individuals born small for gestational age and those with SRS. However, many specific management issues exist and evidence from controlled trials remains limited. SRS is primarily a clinical diagnosis; however, molecular testing enables confirmation of the clinical diagnosis and defines the subtype. A 'normal' result from a molecular test does not exclude the diagnosis of SRS. The management of children with SRS requires an experienced, multidisciplinary approach. Specific issues include growth failure, severe feeding difficulties, gastrointestinal problems, hypoglycaemia, body asymmetry, scoliosis, motor and speech delay and psychosocial challenges. An early emphasis on adequate nutritional status is important, with awareness that rapid postnatal weight gain might lead to subsequent increased risk of metabolic disorders. The benefits of treating patients with SRS with growth hormone include improved body composition, motor development and appetite, reduced risk of hypoglycaemia and increased height. Clinicians should be aware of possible premature adrenarche, fairly early and rapid central puberty and insulin resistance. Treatment with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues can delay progression of central puberty and preserve adult height potential. Long-term follow up is essential to determine the natural history and optimal management in adulthood.

Copyright © 2018 European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation (ECCO). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved

INTRODUCTION : The introduction and broad use of new immunosuppressive agents, including biologic agents and JAK inhibitors, have revolutionised treatment of inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] in recent decades. With such immunosuppression, the potential for opportunistic infection is a key safety concern. [...]

RATIONALE: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients undergo several diagnostic and therapeutic procedures every day. The prevalence, intensity, and risk factors of pain related to these procedures are not well known. OBJECTIVES: To assess self-reported procedural pain intensity versus baseline pain, examine pain intensity differences across procedures, and identify risk factors for procedural pain intensity. METHODS: Prospective, cross-sectional, multicenter, multinational study of pain intensity associated with 12 procedures. Data were obtained from 3,851 patients who underwent 4,812 procedures in 192 ICUs in 28 countries. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Pain intensity on a 0-10 numeric rating scale increased significantly from baseline pain during all procedures (P < 0.001). Chest tube removal, wound drain removal, and arterial line insertion were the three most painful procedures, with median pain scores of 5 (3-7), 4.5 (2-7), and 4 (2-6), respectively. By multivariate analysis, risk factors independently associated with greater procedural pain intensity were the specific procedure; opioid administration specifically for the procedure; preprocedural pain intensity; preprocedural pain distress; intensity of the worst pain on the same day, before the procedure; and procedure not performed by a nurse. A significant ICU effect was observed, with no visible effect of country because of its absorption by the ICU effect. Some of the risk factors became nonsignificant when each procedure was examined separately. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of risk factors for greater procedural pain intensity identified in this study may help clinicians select interventions that are needed to minimize procedural pain. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01070082).

Crohn’s disease [CD] is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] that can result in progressive bowel damage and disability.1 CD can affect individuals of any age, from children to the elderly,2,3 and may cause significant morbidity and impact on quality of life [QoL]. The precise aetiology of CD remains unknown and a curative therapy is not yet available. Contemporary therapy therefore is focused on control of inflammation, using medications along with timely surgical interventions to alleviate the symptoms of bowel damage. The European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] produces several guidelines aimed at providing evidence-based guidance on critical aspects of IBD care. In 2020, ECCO published new guidelines on the management of CD in two manuscripts focused on the medical and surgical management of disease.4,5 For the 2020 CD guidelines, ECCO adopted the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation [GRADE] approach, a systematic process for developing guidelines that addresses how to frame the health care questions, summarise the evidence, formulate the recommendations, and grade their strength and quality of associated evidence.6 The present manuscript represents an update to the 2020 guidelines and is focused specifically on medical management of CD, and a companion manuscript developed as part of the same process addresses optimal surgical management.5 We take a drug-by-drug approach to review the evidence for various medical and dietary strategies used in the management of CD. For this iteration of the guidelines, we have introduced several new, clinically relevant questions as chosen by members of the guidelines group, a systematic approach to reviewing and updating previous topics to incorporate any new evidence, and a reappraisal of all evidence in the context of contemporary practice. We have also introduced several ‘practice points’ to summarise evidence, and expert recommendations in certain key areas of practice where the evidence base is limited but where clinicians and patients need to make decisions nonetheless. Here, where application of the GRADE methodology might be impractical, we have used an approach based on systematic literature review, expert discussion, and voting to form consensus recommendations outside the formal GRADE process. It is important to remember that achieving optimal outcomes in CD relies not just on knowledge of the appropriate use of current medical and surgical therapies but also on careful attention to wider aspects of management, including early diagnosis, prompt initial management,7 close monitoring of treatment response, and psychological and dietary support.8 The development of these guidelines followed the GRADE workflow, as adopted in previous ECCO guidelines.9 A panel of 46 experts were selected from an open call according to criteria based on IBD expertise, scientific background, knowledge of GRADE methodology, and prior contribution to ECCO projects. Additionally, six patients with CD selected by the European Federation of Crohn’s and Colitis Associations [EFFCA] were invited to participate in discussions. The group was supported in their work by a team of professional methodologists and librarians. The panellists first agreed on a list of questions using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes [PICO] format. PICO questions addressed as part of the 2020 ECCO CD guidelines were reviewed and considered for retention with regards to ongoing relevance, and new PICO questions were formulated, discussed, and added to the list. The relevant outcomes for all PICO questions were graded according to importance using a Delphi consensus process. Note that for PICO questions retained from 2020, the importance of the outcomes was nonetheless revised according to the results of this new consensus. The professional librarians next performed a comprehensive literature search on EMBASE, PubMed/Medline, and Cochrane Central databases, using specific search strings developed for each PICO question [Supplementary files available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC online]. For PICO questions retained from the 2020 guidelines, the same search string was used as during the prior literature search, and the start date of database queries set to the same as the end search date for the previous guidelines 1 April 2018. For all new PICO questions, the search start date was unlimited. Two independent consensus group members assessed the relevance of each abstract to the PICO and included or excluded all the relevant papers for the final data extraction and analysis. Subsequently, group members systematically reviewed and summarised the evidence on every outcome voted as ‘important’ or ‘critical’, to compile a Summary of Findings [SoF] table for each question, or updated the prior SoF tables from 2020 [including revision according to any changes to outcomes deemed critical or important]. We adopted a standard hierarchical approach, searching for recent, high-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials to use in preference to individual randomised clinical trials [RCTs] or observational studies. Results of individual studies were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis as appropriate and when needed. The quality of evidence was then classified and used to inform draft recommendations according to the GRADE methodology.6 GRADE evidence levels for safety data tended to be low, due to downgrading for sparsity of events, reflecting the overall relative safety of the interventions under consideration. Therefore, whereas the evidence for all ‘important’ and ‘critical’ outcomes was considered in the drafting of a recommendation, we decided to base the overall assessment of evidence quality used to inform the strength of each recommendation upon the lowest quality of evidence obtained for the clinical or endoscopic outcomes for each PICO question. Where evidence was not available for an outcome of critical importance, this was reflected in the overall assessment of the quality of the evidence. The assessment of evidence for all individual outcomes was available to all panel members and is presented in the Supplementary materials. During initial discussions and based on feedback from previous ECCO guidelines, we recognised that in certain areas of CD management there are limited high-quality sources of evidence available, but that clinicians and patients must make decisions nonetheless. There are also broad, overarching themes relating to approaches to care that cannot be readily formulated into a PICO question. Use of the GRADE approach in these areas can be resource intensive and lead to recommendations of limited clinical utility. We therefore decided to frame a separate series of ‘practice points’ for such common areas of importance. For these, the systematic literature review and data extraction exercise were followed and the findings used to inform drafting of an expert recommendation. We recognise that the resulting practice points are based upon a different level of evidence compared with the GRADE recommendations, but hope that they will be of practical use to readers nonetheless. These are clearly delineated in the text as distinct from GRADE recommendations. All recommendations and practice points were subject to two rounds of online voting by the panel members, the ECCO National for each with and from a list of ECCO members to the open call but were not selected to be part of the The of all recommendations and practice points were panel members during a series of final consensus to a final were at of the panellists agreed with the The resulting and draft of this manuscript were reviewed by two members and by the ECCO members, also the final of these and practice points are by with and therapy presented where All be in the context of the text that A of the and text is presented at the start of each of The literature search the relevant of and a of the and the SoF tables on the evidence can be in the Supplementary available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC We the use of for of of CD recommendation, We the use of as therapy in CD recommendation, in contemporary management of CD, of disease based on a of evidence of There have new studies on in of published the published ECCO guidelines on in A meta-analysis was performed by the ECCO group on that compared therapy with or with in patients with CD. of were for or CD. clinical therapy and were and these data are with treatment were treatment and were for of compared with for of clinical and treatment meta-analysis data on the impact of therapy on clinical for impact of pooled data from trials for a of a in the of the Crohn’s compared with of the clinical of this is not with as therapy in CD are from performed prior to data clinical and treatment and by disease patients with whereas with not have clinical compared with There are data on the use of or as therapy in CD. for the of in patients with CD. clinical trials assessed 1 and and with a significant for clinical outcomes with for significant was based on disease such as for patients with or with the of all the studies in CD, of the trials were to in different significant were in or and safety can be the limited available safety data in CD in and in We for the of clinical in patients with CD limited to the recommendation, are in of in CD and have a have a in of of CD but have as A systematic review and compared the and safety of therapy with with included of patients with CD with disease in the or was to for clinical at In due to and were and updated meta-analysis in new from and reviewed two with for CD. in also compared with 1 in patients with CD and disease in the or clinical at as compared with clinical in or were patients data are the impact of on and were and not to be for the of in We can be used as therapy in patients with CD recommendation, are in of in CD, they are associated with significant morbidity and Therefore, they be used as therapy when there is available for timely be used as The of or compared with for the treatment of CD was assessed in two from these studies were in a Cochrane systematic was at a of and on a to and to resulting in a of from to with a of on for with to a of based on the patients on of clinical was common in patients compared with were as in clinical in the two patients on were available from patients with The of was in patients compared with included and A of patients or to these is In to the there is evidence on the of use with of and associated with a of for all and safety outcomes to the downgrading of evidence to The of with a to the recommendation as to in their practice. In where are the need for a of in 1 or the of to and a clinical or a We the use of as therapy for CD recommendation, We can be used as therapy in CD recommendation, may be in of in CD by but clinicians their and the of studies have compared with for of and in the data have in a Cochrane systematic trials for of clinical in with used and The trials in the of and the of and for There was significant in clinical compared with trials clinical using disease based on There was significant compared with and data to downgrading the quality of evidence to A on during with significant and were in two of of developed The quality of evidence was deemed due to a of and In with data the of of a recommendation use as therapy was the quality of evidence. as meta-analysis of six studies the and safety in patients with CD was to evidence in patients was to for clinical a meta-analysis also that a of patients due to compared with and The included and The that is in patients can be by or prior to of the common in also to and can also be prior to treatment studies have also limited as therapy in A an for in patients when compared with on are at for and with patients and a previous at A systematic review and meta-analysis on the of in patients to patients to or that the pooled of was on are also at an of and may have an of and The to be to or with the of in and the safety this the use of as therapy and is reflected in the recommendation by the consensus We can be used as therapy in CD recommendation, We can be used as therapy in CD recommendation, may be in the treatment of CD, whereas studies of have to In the patients with CD were randomised to of or for with a of at that was a of patients with were in clinical The of treatment for and was when compared with The for are and the results may be by the use of There were studies use with for the of resulting in of evidence when patients Two studies the of at or compared with in patients with CD, and significant for of clinical may be considered as an for patients when [including cannot be The of the must be considered and patients data that in in on the use of as therapy is from a where patients with CD were of or for with CD, of treatment with were to or for for CD were the of patients in clinical was in the group in were and patients in the group with may be at of as in a studies in patients with IBD to such an as not to be for of in We as therapy with CD recommendation, We as therapy in CD recommendation, We therapy with a when as therapy in patients with CD recommendation, We therapy with and for a of when using as therapy in patients with CD recommendation, In patients with CD have with the of and we to and of recommendation, is for the and of in CD. therapy used during and for the first can and data to this practice are from studies with a the can be in may be in patients with prior to an is is at a of at and during and every when The of for therapy in patients with CD was in a of or with In this standard of was to for clinical at of was not for clinical at were not safety was in this were pooled for all of any on the safety of standard of with the level of by the of the the points of followed by and separate meta-analysis focused on the outcomes of therapy in patients with CD. Two were published and were pooled for the of this In patients clinically to of were the overall of achieving clinical with or every was as of was assessed at in of patients in the group of In the and were not different and In a performed in the of a Cochrane the for for was for clinical and endoscopic outcomes for therapy was due to and the is the standard of in the two to an overall assessment of the level of evidence as consensus decided to make a recommendation for use in therapy based on relating to and safety of standard and the of as with The compared the of with in patients to to to or therapy in of clinical at when compared with therapy was also to result in at this There were of in therapy with in In several and observational and a meta-analysis have also the of therapy with therapy with to by of For patients clinical with therapy with and two data on therapy the these are the for of with and the for of with of these data of and as in from resulting in therapy was not in clinical clinical or clinical were with therapy whereas were for was based on and safety data every with data have the of for clinical and endoscopic to that this is an for to studies have the and safety of patients on standard of to recommendations on therapy may with evidence on the and of The of therapy with a is associated with safety in of of and questions of treatment for patients in The clinical in CD patients in clinical for a under and therapy or or In this with randomised CD clinical was of when therapy was to when compared with There were significant in clinical endoscopic or outcomes the group therapy and at a treatment In a of when are with the and are at in a meta-analysis of patients included in the In clinical the to be with the and for disease and disease be in patients with a first the of during to a and In these of be with with considered in patients prior We as therapy in patients with CD recommendation, We as therapy in CD recommendation, We be used therapy with as therapy in patients with CD to recommendation, We be used with an as therapy in patients with CD to recommendation, is for the and of in CD. evidence not with an in therapy may be considered in patients with prior to an is a for the treatment of CD. is at a of and then followed by every A meta-analysis of pooled data on from patients with CD, not or were to for of clinical and clinical of therapy endoscopic data were available for the in the data a significant this evidence was due to from There was in or during the of with were also not different from but evidence was due to from based on the of therapy A Cochrane review based on results for clinical response, in and during the first of from in individuals with CD, to therapy of every for of clinical at of Outcomes of clinical but not were also with data on endoscopic outcomes are but of relative to in endoscopic endoscopic and on a of a was with safety during the pooled clinical data that was associated with and with any and were In a performed in the of a Cochrane the for for was the use of therapy of with a when compared with for the of clinical in patients to In this therapy was not to for clinical at therapy was associated with endoscopic at this was by There was in to associated with therapy The outcomes of the clinical of therapy in clinical clinical clinical endoscopic or any a meta-analysis that included studies also that therapy was not to for of of six and with and therapy when compared with in CD patients with disease control on The included patients to In the of of to a first evidence that therapy is of with the Additionally, the observational a significant in development with therapy in patients that patients may from therapy with and a on Therefore, with an be considered in including with prior to We can be used as therapy in patients with CD recommendation, We can be used as therapy in CD recommendation, may be an treatment for the and of in CD. is not by the European is a of a is not by the European for the treatment of CD, is available including in and The and safety of for therapy in patients with to CD was in trials including a of A Cochrane review from the and safety of as therapy for was to for of clinical and clinical outcomes were not The of any were not different and Two assessed the and safety of as therapy every in patients with CD and A of patients previous were included and followed for with a clinical points from and in of clinical as assessed by a in the from a significant in patients with with a relative of outcomes were not The of not patients with and with a relative of In a performed in the of a Cochrane the for for was The of all at the early points of in downgrading the evidence quality of clinical with the of endoscopic the consensus group decided that the strength of recommendation be with the recommendation for as a and the and of including the consensus group agreed that the recommendation for use of as therapy also be There is evidence to the use of compared with monitoring or standard of care. when using recommendation, monitoring may be used when in patients with CD with The use of monitoring for therapy was with a GRADE and development of a practice GRADE of data not of monitoring compared with monitoring or when GRADE assessment of the literature during development of the practice several in monitoring can be when of is reflected in use in clinical practice as in the studies and of have that during therapy are associated with of outcomes in patients with are also associated with of and development of A key question is in clinical based on of levels or can clinical data from significant and therapy in clinical clinical endoscopic or these important including a for of and the that not start early during In a systematic review and there was significant in the of to clinical in patients clinically in patients with CD with therapy meta-analysis of compared with management in clinical with this there was evidence to the use of monitoring for patients with CD treatment with the consensus group that there was evidence for important outcomes outside the of voted GRADE may to the A meta-analysis including studies and that of therapy was associated with a of treatment compared with standard of care or was associated with a significant in These findings were in meta-analysis that also of may also be in clinical such as therapy a in and when therapy with an is not due to preference or of data from two including patients with CD, that can also of to therapy and treatment in patients with a to to development of and from studies were not included in the GRADE analysis. evidence from that of therapy is associated with outcomes compared with clinically based or in CD in In the including children with CD to therapy to that clinical was in the compared with the a on a with CD, to that compared with clinically based was clinical and endoscopic as the of and when or may the these in may data that this may be a associated with for the with the evidence base reflected in the GRADE the consensus group a for in clinical when available. several for therapy including of optimal and of timely there is evidence of for in CD, there is evidence to a for and use of in the care of patients with is not We as therapy in CD recommendation, We as therapy in CD recommendation, is for the and of in CD. is an that to the by the and In CD, is using a of systematic review and meta-analysis pooled the results from in was compared with for of in patients with to patients with different or on outcomes at were and a meta-analysis was in clinical and clinical Two patients that patients endoscopic compared with and a in the to at A the and safety of in CD, in was in a results at Two on the of on The was for achieving for and for at of patients clinically and at compared with in a pooled of two pooled safety results of on any or The pooled of any was not different and the pooled of any and of any were not different and and The of was a of observational studies that of patients clinical response, clinical and clinical at the results of in a of patients with CD. outcomes were also included patients with CD to were to every or every or patients when compared with were in clinical a and at The same that patients were also in clinical a and of treatment results were for clinical There are limited data from a on endoscopic and of any patients presented with in at at There was significant in or endoscopic and outcome data from a randomised treatment with every with every endoscopic outcomes the two In that compared with A pooled safety from studies that there was significant or patients for and for a of We or are as as therapy in patients with CD recommendation, We and are as as therapy in patients with CD recommendation, evidence that and may be for the and of in CD in patients prior The was an randomised that used a to the and safety of and in patients with to CD. the of endoscopic disease for was compared with several studies at of any The was the of patients in clinical at A of patients were and to or was on followed by of at and then every was on at followed by of at and then every were as and were for of at to and at were with evidence. outcomes for not significant outcomes at of patients every of patients every were in clinical clinical was in of the group and of the group treatment endoscopic and endoscopic at the safety was for and the of patients in the group was in the group of were the consensus group that data from this and safety with evidence the used of that not with and was not The findings may not to patients with previous therapy or disease 1 be to and safety are with each this to a to make a recommendation, reflecting the strength of the evidence and these We as therapy in CD recommendation, high-quality We as therapy in CD high-quality is for the and of in CD. is a that to the of Two were The two studies included a of patients with to CD, with outcome data to of and or with outcome at and clinical were in patients compared with and and endoscopic were with and of any in patients with in patients and in patients and to from the two trials were in a therapy A of every and with patients with clinical or endoscopic at A of patients on also clinical response, endoscopic and 1 of The overall of any or were We as therapy in CD recommendation, We as therapy in CD recommendation, is for the and of in CD. is a that by the resulting in of and It is at a of at and for not at can from an at patients with or on clinical and safety outcomes in patients with to CD at were and a meta-analysis was was to in of clinical and clinical outcome data were not The pooled of any was not different and the pooled of was not different and A of observational studies that of the patients clinical response, clinical clinical and at the results of in a of patients with CD. therapy with was in in patients with CD to was at every in two and at every in of was to in achieving clinical with of patients in clinical when compared with of patients was at clinical this was in of patients compared with of patients endoscopic data were during the endoscopic outcomes have during clinical trials and a of and compared with safety were in the safety that followed CD patients to

Infections with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) are increasingly being reported from patients in healthcare settings. They are associated with high patient morbidity, attributable mortality and hospital costs. Patients who are “at-risk” may be carriers of these multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (MDR-E). The purpose of this guidance is to raise awareness and identify the “at-risk” patient when admitted to a healthcare setting and to outline effective infection prevention and control measures to halt the entry and spread of CRE. The guidance was created by a group of experts who were functioning independently of their organisations, during two meetings hosted by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. A list of epidemiological risk factors placing patients “at-risk” for carriage with CRE was created by the experts. The conclusions of a systematic review on the prevention of spread of CRE, with the addition of expert opinion, were used to construct lists of core and supplemental infection prevention and control measures to be implemented for “at-risk” patients upon admission to healthcare settings. Individuals with the following profile are “at-risk” for carriage of CRE: a) a history of an overnight stay in a healthcare setting in the last 12 months, b) dialysis-dependent or cancer chemotherapy in the last 12 months, c) known previous carriage of CRE in the last 12 months and d) epidemiological linkage to a known carrier of a CRE. Core infection prevention and control measures that should be considered for all patients in healthcare settings were compiled. Preliminary supplemental measures to be implemented for “at-risk” patients on admission are: pre-emptive isolation, active screening for CRE, and contact precautions. Patients who are confirmed positive for CRE will need additional supplemental measures. Strengthening the microbiological capacity, surveillance and reporting of new cases of CRE in healthcare settings and countries is necessary to monitor the epidemiological situation so that, if necessary, the implemented CRE prevention strategies can be refined in a timely manner. Creating a large communication network to exchange this information would be helpful to understand the extent of the CRE reservoir and to prevent infections in healthcare settings, by applying the principles outlined here. This guidance document offers suggestions for best practices, but is in no way prescriptive for all healthcare settings and all countries. Successful implementation will result if there is local commitment and accountability. The options for intervention can be adopted or adapted to local needs, depending on the availability of financial and structural resources.

Auxetic mechanical metamaterials are engineered systems that exhibit the unusual macroscopic property of a negative Poisson's ratio due to sub-unit structure rather than chemical composition. Although their unique behaviour makes them superior to conventional materials in many practical applications, they are limited in availability. Here, we propose a new class of hierarchical auxetics based on the rotating rigid units mechanism. These systems retain the enhanced properties from having a negative Poisson's ratio with the added benefits of being a hierarchical system. Using simulations on typical hierarchical multi-level rotating squares, we show that, through design, one can control the extent of auxeticity, degree of aperture and size of the different pores in the system. This makes the system more versatile than similar non-hierarchical ones, making them promising candidates for industrial and biomedical applications, such as stents and skin grafts.

Contains fulltext : 293864.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

OBJECTIVE: The Epi-IBD cohort is a prospective population-based inception cohort of unselected patients with inflammatory bowel disease from 29 European centres covering a background population of almost 10 million people. The aim of this study was to assess the 5-year outcome and disease course of patients with Crohn's disease (CD). DESIGN: Patients were followed up prospectively from the time of diagnosis, including collection of their clinical data, demographics, disease activity, medical therapy, surgery, cancers and deaths. Associations between outcomes and multiple covariates were analysed by Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: In total, 488 patients were included in the study. During follow-up, 107 (22%) patients received surgery, while 176 (36%) patients were hospitalised because of CD. A total of 49 (14%) patients diagnosed with non-stricturing, non-penetrating disease progressed to either stricturing and/or penetrating disease. These rates did not differ between patients from Western and Eastern Europe. However, significant geographic differences were noted regarding treatment: more patients in Western Europe received biological therapy (33%) and immunomodulators (66%) than did those in Eastern Europe (14% and 54%, respectively, P<0.01), while more Eastern European patients received 5-aminosalicylates (90% vs 56%, P<0.05). Treatment with immunomodulators reduced the risk of surgery (HR: 0.4, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.6) and hospitalisation (HR: 0.3, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.5). CONCLUSION: Despite patients being treated early and frequently with immunomodulators and biological therapy in Western Europe, 5-year outcomes including surgery and phenotype progression in this cohort were comparable across Western and Eastern Europe. Differences in treatment strategies between Western and Eastern European centres did not affect the disease course. Treatment with immunomodulators reduced the risk of surgery and hospitalisation.