Background Anemia is a common extraintestinal manifestation of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) affecting negatively the patients’ quality of life. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and real-life management of anemia in IBD patients in Greece. Methods This study was conducted in 17 Greek IBD referral centers. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, IBD and anemia treatment data were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Results A total of 1394 IBD patients [560 ulcerative colitis (UC), 834 Crohn’s disease (CD)] were enrolled. Anemia at any time was reported in 687 (49.3%) patients of whom 413 (29.6%) had episodic and 274 (19.7%) had recurrent/persistent anemia. Anemia was diagnosed before IBD in 45 (6.5%), along with IBD in 269 (39.2%) and after IBD in 373 (54.3%) patients. In the multivariate analysis the presence of extraintestinal manifestations (p = 0.0008), IBD duration (p = 0.026), IBD related surgeries and hospitalizations (p = 0.026 and p = 0.004 accordingly) were risk factors of recurrent/persistent anemia. Serum ferritin was measured in 839 (60.2%) IBD patients. Among anemic patients, 535 (77.9%) received treatment. Iron supplementation was administered in 485 (90.6%) patients, oral in 142 (29.3%) and intravenous in 393 (81%). Conclusions The frequency of anemia in IBD patients, followed at Greek referral centers, is approximately 50%. Development of recurrent/persistent anemia may be observed in 20% of cases and is independently associated with the presence of extraintestinal manifestations, IBD duration, IBD related surgeries and hospitalizations. Anemia treatment is administered in up to $$4/5$$ 4 / 5 of anemia IBD patients with the majority of them receiving iron intravenously.

Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an independent risk factor for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), which is associated significantly with disease severity. We aimed to determine the rates of CDI among hospitalized IBD patients in major tertiary referral hospitals in Greece. Patients and methods A retrospective analysis was carried out of stool cultures from hospitalized patients investigated for diarrhea, during 2016, tested for CDI with glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxins A and B. Results In total, 6932 patients were tested for CDI; 894 were positive for GDH (12.89%) and 339 were also positive for C. difficile toxin (4.89%). The prevalence of CDI among all hospitalized patients was 1.6/1000 patient-days. Among these, there were 401 IBD patients, and 62 were positive for GDH (15.46%) and 30 were also positive for C. difficile toxin (7.48%). The prevalence of CDI in IBD patients was 2.5/1000 patient-days, significantly higher than in non-IBD hospitalized patients (30/401 vs. 309/6531, P=0.013). Among the 30 IBD patients (ulcerative colitis=18, Crohn’s disease=12) with CDI, six were receiving biologics, three were on corticosteroids [one combined with azathioprine (AZA) and one combined with 5-ASA], nine were on AZA monotherapy and 12 were on 5-ASA monotherapy. The prevalence of CDI among patients receiving AZA monotherapy was significantly higher than in patients receiving other medications (9/68 vs. 21/333, P=0.047). Mild CDI (n=28) was treated with metronidazole and/or vancomycin, whereas severe CDI (n=2) was treated with vancomycin. Conclusion The prevalence of CDI is higher in hospitalized IBD patients than those without IBD and AZA monotherapy increases the risk of CDI.

Hepatitis B remains a significant global clinical problem, despite the implementation of safe and effective vaccination programs. The prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) largely follows the regional epidemiologic status. Serological screening with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and antibodies to hepatitis B surface (anti-HBs) and core (anti-HBc) proteins is a key element in the management of IBD patients and, ideally, should be performed at IBD diagnosis. Stratification of individual cases should be done according to the serologic profile and the IBD-specific treatment, with particular emphasis in patients receiving immunosuppressive regimens. In patients who have not contracted HBV, vaccination is indicated to accomplish protective immunity. Vaccination in immunosuppressed patients, however, is a challenging issue and several strategies for primary and revaccination have been proposed. The risk of HBV reactivation in patients with IBD should be considered in both HBsAg-positive and HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients, when immunosuppressive therapies are administered. HBV reactivation is preventable via the administration of prophylactic nucleot(s)ide analogues and should be the standard approach in HBsAg-positive patients. HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients represent a non-homogeneous group and bear a significantly lower risk of HBV reactivation. Biochemical, serological and molecular monitoring is currently the recommended approach for anti-HBc patients. Acute HBV infection is rarely reported in IBD patients. In the present review, we outline the problems associated with HBV infection in patients with IBD and present updated evidence for their management.

No abstract

No abstract