Cobalamin deficiency is common in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD). Intramuscular cobalamin continues to be the standard therapy for the deficiency and maintenance treatment in these patients, although oral route has been demonstrated to be effective in other pathologies with impaired absorption. Our aims were to evaluate the efficacy of oral therapy in the treatment of cobalamin deficiency and in long-term maintenance in patients with Crohn’s disease. We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study that included 94 patients with Crohn’s disease and cobalamin deficiency. Seventy-six patients had B12 deficiency and 94.7% of them normalized their cobalamin levels with oral treatment. The most used dose was 1 mg/day, but there were no significant differences in treatment effectiveness depending on the dose used (≥1 mg/24 h vs. <1 mg/24 h). Eighty-two patients had previous documented B12 deficiency and were treated with oral B12 to maintain their correct cobalamin levels. After a mean follow-up of 3 years, the oral route was effective as maintenance treatment in 81.7% of patients. A lack of treatment adherence was admitted by 46.6% of patients in who the oral route failed. In conclusion, our study shows that oral cyanocobalamin provides effective acute and maintenance treatment for vitamin B12 deficiency caused by CD with or without ileum resection.

We aim to describe the incidence and source of contagion of COVID-19 in patients with IBD, as well as the risk factors for a severe course and long-term sequelae. This is a prospective observational study of IBD and COVID-19 included in the ENEIDA registry (53,682 from 73 centres) between March–July 2020 followed-up for 12 months. Results were compared with data of the general population (National Centre of Epidemiology and Catalonia). A total of 482 patients with COVID-19 were identified. Twenty-eight percent were infected in the work environment, and 48% were infected by intrafamilial transmission, despite having good adherence to lockdown. Thirty-five percent required hospitalization, 7.9% had severe COVID-19 and 3.7% died. Similar data were reported in the general population (hospitalisation 19.5%, ICU 2.1% and mortality 4.6%). Factors related to death and severe COVID-19 were being aged ≥ 60 years (OR 7.1, 95% CI: 1.8–27 and 4.5, 95% CI: 1.3–15.9), while having ≥2 comorbidities increased mortality (OR 3.9, 95% CI: 1.3–11.6). None of the drugs for IBD were related to severe COVID-19. Immunosuppression was definitively stopped in 1% of patients at 12 months. The prognosis of COVID-19 in IBD, even in immunosuppressed patients, is similar to that in the general population. Thus, there is no need for more strict protection measures in IBD.

Ultrasound has an excellent diagnostic performance when Crohn's disease is suspected, when performing an activity assessment, or determining the extension and location of Crohn's disease, very similar to other examinations such as MRI or CT. It has a good correlation with endoscopic lesions and allows the detection of complications such as strictures, fistulas or abscesses. It complements colonoscopy in the diagnosis and, given its tolerance, cost and immediacy, it can be considered as a good tool for disease monitoring. In ulcerative colitis, its role is less relevant, being limited to assessing the extent and activity when it is not possible with other diagnostic techniques or if there are doubts with these. Despite its advantages, its use in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is not widespread in Spain. For this reason, this document reviews the advantages and disadvantages of the technique to promote knowledge about it and implementation of it in IBD Units.

(1) Aims: Patients receiving antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy are at risk of developing tuberculosis (TB), usually due to the reactivation of a latent TB infection (LTBI). LTBI screening and treatment decreases the risk of TB. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of different LTBI screening strategies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). (2) Methods: Patients in the Spanish ENEIDA registry with IBD screened for LTBI between January 2003 and January 2018 were included. The diagnostic yield of different strategies (dual screening with tuberculin skin test [TST] and interferon-ץ-release assay [IGRA], two-step TST, and early screening performed at least 12 months before starting biological treatment) was analyzed. (3) Results: Out of 7594 screened patients, 1445 (19%; 95% CI 18–20%) had LTBI. Immunomodulator (IMM) treatment at screening decreased the probability of detecting LTBI (20% vs. 17%, p = 0.001). Regarding screening strategies, LTBI was more frequently diagnosed by dual screening than by a single screening strategy (IGRA, OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.50–0.73, p < 0.001; TST, OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.66–0.88, p < 0.001). Two-step TST increased the diagnostic yield of a single TST by 24%. More cases of LTBI were diagnosed by early screening than by routine screening before starting anti-TNF agents (21% [95% CI 20–22%] vs. 14% [95% CI 13–16%], p < 0.001). The highest diagnostic performance for LTBI (29%) was obtained by combining early and TST/IGRA dual screening strategies in patients without IMM. (4): Conclusions: Both early screening and TST/IGRA dual screening strategies significantly increased diagnostic performance for LTBI in patients with IBD, with optimal performance achieved when they are used together in the absence of IMM.

(1) Scant information is available concerning the characteristics that may favour the acquisition of COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess these differences between infected and noninfected patients with IBD. (2) This nationwide case–control study evaluated patients with inflammatory bowel disease with COVID-19 (cases) and without COVID-19 (controls) during the period March–July 2020 included in the ENEIDA of GETECCU. (3) A total of 496 cases and 964 controls from 73 Spanish centres were included. No differences were found in the basal characteristics between cases and controls. Cases had higher comorbidity Charlson scores (24% vs. 19%; p = 0.02) and occupational risk (28% vs. 10.5%; p < 0.0001) more frequently than did controls. Lockdown was the only protective measure against COVID-19 (50% vs. 70%; p < 0.0001). No differences were found in the use of systemic steroids, immunosuppressants or biologics between cases and controls. Cases were more often treated with 5-aminosalicylates (42% vs. 34%; p = 0.003). Having a moderate Charlson score (OR: 2.7; 95%CI: 1.3–5.9), occupational risk (OR: 2.9; 95%CI: 1.8–4.4) and the use of 5-aminosalicylates (OR: 1.7; 95%CI: 1.2–2.5) were factors for COVID-19. The strict lockdown was the only protective factor (OR: 0.1; 95%CI: 0.09–0.2). (4) Comorbidities and occupational exposure are the most relevant factors for COVID-19 in patients with IBD. The risk of COVID-19 seems not to be increased by immunosuppressants or biologics, with a potential effect of 5-aminosalicylates, which should be investigated further and interpreted with caution.