P354 Early treatment versus active surveillance after ileocolic resection in Crohn’s disease: a retrospective cohort study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) often require ileocolic resection (ICR) due to refractory disease or disease-related complications, such as intestinal strictures, enteric fistulae or intra-abdominal abscesses. Up to 70% of patients will develop new endoscopic lesions in the neoterminal ileum within the first year after surgery. We assessed if the timing of postoperative treatment can reduce postoperative recurrence (POR) rate. Methods We performed a retrospective, single-center observational cohort study in a tertiary hospital. All CD patients undergoing abdominal surgery from January 1st 2015 until June 30th 2019 were screened. Patients with CD who underwent ileocolic resection with ileocolic anastomosis were included. Depending on the postoperative management patients were divided in two groups: “wait and see” if medical treatment was not initiated before endoscopic evaluation 6 months after surgery (n=109), “treat” if medical treatment was initiated directly after surgery (n=49). Patients whose postoperative follow-up occurred in another center were excluded. Data were collected by review of the electronic medical charts and included patient demographics, disease characteristics (Montreal classification), medication, indication for surgery and POR assessment. POR was defined as clinical (PRO2 pain >1 or loose stool frequency >1.5), endoscopic (Rutgeerts score > i2a) or radiologic (disease activity on MR enterography necessitating treatment). Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards model. Results In total 158 patients met the inclusion criteria: 109 patients in the “wait and see” group and 49 in the “treat” group. The main baseline characteristics of the cohorts are summarized in figure 1. The main indication for surgery was stricturing disease in both groups (69.7% and 65.3%) followed by penetrating disease (42.2% and 24.5%) and refractory disease (6.4% and 20.4%). Postoperative management did not significantly influence the risk for POR (figure 2). The same was also observed in patients with known risk factors for POR (figure 3). Patients with a high body mass index (>25 kg/m²) had a significant greater risk for developing POR (HR 1.65, CI 1.09-2.5, p=0.019; figure 4). Conclusion There was no statistical significant difference in POR between immediate treatment after ICR and active surveillance with endoscopy 6 months after surgery. Prospective randomized trials with long follow-up are needed to further explore the use of adjuvant postoperative treatment to prevent POR.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».