Iron deficiency is the most common cause of anemia globally and is frequently reported in patients with underlying inflammatory conditions, such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Ferric maltol is a new oral iron replacement therapy designed to optimize iron absorption while reducing the gastrointestinal adverse events associated with unabsorbed free iron. Ferric maltol has been studied in clinical trials involving almost 750 adults and adolescents with iron-deficiency anemia associated with IBD, CKD, and other underlying conditions, and it has been widely used in clinical practice. It is approved for the treatment of adults with iron deficiency with or without anemia, independent of the underlying condition, and is commercially available in Europe and the United States. We review the published evidence for ferric maltol, which demonstrates consistent and clinically meaningful improvements in hemoglobin and measures of iron availability (ferritin and transferrin saturation) and shows that it is well-tolerated over long-term treatment for up to 64 weeks—an important consideration in patients with chronic underlying conditions such as IBD and CKD. We believe that ferric maltol is an effective, convenient, and well-tolerated treatment option for iron deficiency and iron-deficiency anemia, especially when long-term management of chronic iron deficiency is required. Writing support was provided by Shield Therapeutics (Gateshead, UK).

Purpose: The clinical course of ulcerative colitis (UC) is highly heterogeneous, with 20 to 30% of patients experiencing chronic disease activity requiring immunosuppressive or biologic therapies. The aim of this study was to identify predictors for a complicated disease course in an inception cohort of patients with UC. Methods: EPICOL was a prospective, observational, inception cohort (UC diagnosis, ≤ 6 months) study in 311 patients with UC who were naive to immunosuppressants (IS)/biologics. A complicated course of disease was defined as the need for IS and/or biologic treatment (here therapy with a TNF-α antagonist) and/or UC-related hospitalisation. Patients were followed up for 24 months. Results: Of the 307 out of 311 participants (4 patients did not meet the inclusion criteria “confirmed diagnosis of active UC within the last 6 months” (n = 2) and “immunosuppressive-naïve” (n = 2), analysis population), 209 (68.1%) versus 98 (31.9%) had an uncomplicated versus a complicated disease course, respectively. In a multivariate regression analysis, prior use of corticosteroids and prior anaemia were associated with a significantly increased risk for a complicated disease course (2.3- and 1.9-fold increase, respectively; p < 0.001 and p = 0.002). Based on these parameters, a risk model for patient stratification was developed. Conclusion: Our study identifies anaemia and an early need for corticosteroids as predictors for a complicated course of disease in an inception cohort of patients with UC. By determining these parameters in routine clinical practice, our results may support the identification of patients who might benefit from early escalation of therapy.

EUS-guided fine needle aspiration cytology (FNA) is the gold standard of evaluation of solid pancreatic lesions. However, accuracy is generally low. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield of conventional cytology (CC) with liquid-based cytological analysis using an ethanol based fixative system (LBC) without onsite cytopathological assessment. We performed a retrospective evaluation in patients referred to the Department of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy at Jena University Hospital for FNA of pancreatic masses between 2008 and 2015. LBC preservation of specimen was introduced in April 2011. Gold standard was defined as a surgically obtained histology or a patient follow-up of at least 1 year for diagnosis or exclusion of malignancy. 172 patients were included into the final analysis. Mean age was 64.8 years (SD 12.4 years), 105 patients were male. 107 lesions were malignant, while 65 lesions were benign. 89 specimens were evaluated by CC, whereas 83 specimens were processed by LBC. Liquid-based cytology performed significantly better than conventional cytology in terms of sensitivity (87.8% vs 67.2% (P = .021)), specificity (100% vs 87.1% (P = .047)) negative predictive value (NPV) (85% vs 58.7% (P = .009)) and accuracy (92.8% vs 74.2% (P = .001)). We observed no learning curve after implementation of LBC Liquid based cytology is a simple and inexpensive technique that helps improving sensitivity, specificity, NPV and accuracy over conventional cytology in fine needle aspirates from patients with pancreatic lesions. Therefore, this real-world evidence shows, that EUS-FNA specimen processing should be performed using LBC to achieve best possible results.

Background: Despite recent advances in endoscopic technology adenoma miss rate still is up to 20% contributing to interval cancers. Improved imaging modalities have been introduced to increase adenoma detection rate (ADR). Recently, narrow-band imaging (NBI) (Exera II series, Olympus Corporation) was not significantly better than high-definition white light colonoscopy (HD-WLC). An improved second generation of NBI (190-NBI) is characterized by better illumination of the bowel lumen and may be associated with a higher ADR. Methods: We performed a prospective randomized study on patients referred to the Jena University Hospital for screening or surveillance colonoscopy between January 2015 and April 2017. Participating endoscopists were divided into 2 subgroups depending on their individual experience. Colonoscopy was performed by use of HD-WLC or 190-NBI upon withdrawal. Results: Five hundred fifty-three patients participated in the study. Eighty patients were excluded (insufficient bowel cleansing [n = 34], anticoagulation precluding polypectomy [n=15], partial colonic resection [n=9], other reasons [n = 22]). Mean age was 66.9 years (standard deviation 10.3 years), and 253 patients were male (53.5%). Bowel preparation and withdrawal time were not different. ADR among all subgroups was 39.4% using HD-WLC, but only 29.1% were using 190-NBI (P = .02). Number of polyps per patient was lower using 190-NBI than with HD-WLC (0.58 vs 0.86; P = .02). Subgroup analysis revealed that 190-NBI was inferior to HD-WLC only in unexperienced endoscopists. Conclusion: In our stud,y ADR was lower by use of 190-NBI. These differences persisted only in unexperienced investigators. 190-NBI seems to be more challenging regarding ADR, requiring more intensive training prior to implementing this technology in daily clinical care. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT03081975).

Hintergrund: Gastrointestinale Infektionen bei Patienten mit chronisch-entzündlichen Darmerkrankungen (CED) können einen Risikofaktor für ein potenziell schweres Rezidiv mit längerem Krankheitsverlauf darstellen. Unklar ist, ob im deutschen DRG-System die entstehenden Behandlungskosten durch entsprechende Erlöse ausgeglichen werden. Methode: In einer Fallkontrollstudie wurden alle zwischen 2002 und 2011 in der Klinik für Innere Medizin IV des Universitätsklinikums Jena (UKJ) behandelten CED-Patienten (Morbus Crohn, Colitis ulcerosa) mit gastrointestinalen Infektionen (Salmonellen, Shigellen, Campylobacter, Yersinen, Adeno-, Rota- und Noroviren, C. difficile) identifiziert (n = 79). Diesen Patienten wurden jeweils 2 stationär-betreute Patienten (gleiche Hauptdiagnose, gleiches Alter) ohne Infektion gegenübergestellt (n = 158) und eine Vollkostenkalkulation nach dem „Ist-Kostenansatz“ gemäß den in der Krankenhaus-Buchführungsverordnung (KHBV) gegliederten Aufwandsarten durchgeführt. Diesen Kosten wurden die DRG-Hauptdiagnose-bedingten Erlöse (normiert auf den Grouper 2012) gegenübergestellt. Ergebnisse: Gastrointestinale Infektionen führen bei stationär betreuten CED-Patienten nicht zu einer höheren Mortalität. Bei signifikant längerer Verweildauer (14,5 Tage vs. 9,4 Tage; p = 0,002) sind die Behandlungskosten deutlich höher (6499,1 € vs. 2817,0 €; p = 0,001). Obwohl für die Patienten mit gastrointestinalen Infektionen höhere Erlöse ausgewiesen wurden (3833,9 € vs. 2553,5 €; p = 0,005), bedingen die Behandlungskosten dieser Patienten ein höheres Defizit (− 2496,8 € vs. − 433,1 €). Schlussfolgerung: Die Behandlungskosten bei CED-Patienten mit und ohne gastrointestinale Infektionen unterscheiden sich deutlich; diese Unterschiede werden durch höhere Erlöse im DRG-System nicht ausgeglichen. Objective: Gastrointestinal Infections have been implicated as possible causes of exacerbation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or risk factors for severe flares in general. The introduction of the G-DRG reimbursement system has greatly increased the pressure to provide cost effective treatment in German hospitals. Few studies have compared the costs of treating IBD patients with or without gastrointestinal infections and none of them have specifically considered the German reimbursement situation. Methods: We performed a single center case-control retrospective chart review from 2002 to 2011 of inpatients with IBD (Department of Internal Medicine IV, University Hospital Jena) with an exacerbation of their disease. The presence of gastrointestinal infections (Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter, Yersinia, adeno-, rota-, norovirus and Clostridium difficile) was assessed in all inpatients with Cohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). IBD patients with gastrointestinal infections (n = 79) were matched for age to IBD patients who were negative for gastrointestinal pathogens (n = 158). Patient level costing (PLC) was used to express the total cost of hospital care for each patient; PLC comprised a weighted daily bed cost plus cost of all medical services provided (e. g., endoscopy, microbiology, pathology) calculated according to an activity-based costing approach. All costs were discounted to 2012 values. Results: Gastrointestinal infections in IBD patients were not associated with an increase in mortality (0 %); however, they were associated with 2.3-fold higher total hospital charges (6499.10 € vs. 2817.00 €; p = 0.001) and increased length of stay in hospital (14.5 vs. 9.4 days; p < 0.0001). Despite increased reimbursement by DRG for IBD patients with gastrointestinal infections compared to patients without infections (3833.90 € vs. 2553.50 €; p = 0.005), hospital care in these patients was substantially underfunded (deficit − 2496.80 € vs. − 433.10 €) because of increased length of stay with personnel costs, especially in UC. Conclusion: Inpatient hospital costs differ significantly for IBD patients with and without gastrointestinal infections, especially in ulcerative colitis, when care was provided in a single university hospital.