In an analysis of a large cohort of subjects with IBD, we found a significant association between symptoms of depression or anxiety and clinical recurrence. Patients with IBD should therefore be screened for clinically relevant levels of depression and anxiety and referred to psychologists or psychiatrists for further evaluation and treatment.

No abstract

No abstract

Chronic low-grade inflammation is a hallmark of obesity and associated with cardiovascular complications. However, it remains unclear where this inflammation starts. As the gut is constantly exposed to food, gut microbiota, and metabolites, we hypothesized that mucosal immunity triggers an innate inflammatory response in obesity. We characterized five distinct macrophage subpopulations (P1-P5) along the gastrointestinal tract and blood monocyte subpopulations (classical, non-classical, intermediate), which replenish intestinal macrophages, in non-obese (BMI<27kg/m2) and obese individuals (BMI>32kg/m2). To elucidate factors that potentially trigger gut inflammation, we correlated these subpopulations with cardiovascular risk factors and lifestyle behaviors. In obese individuals, we found higher pro-inflammatory macrophages in the stomach, duodenum, and colon. Intermediate blood monocytes were also increased in obesity, suggesting enhanced recruitment to the gut. We identified unhealthy lifestyle habits as potential triggers of gut and systemic inflammation (i.e., low vegetable intake, high processed meat consumption, sedentary lifestyle). Cardiovascular risk factors other than body weight did not affect the innate immune response. Thus, obesity in humans is characterized by gut inflammation as shown by accumulation of pro-inflammatory intestinal macrophages, potentially via recruited blood monocytes. Understanding gut innate immunity in human obesity might open up new targets for immune-modulatory treatments in metabolic disease.

BackgroundColonoscopy (CSPY) for colorectal cancer screening has several limitations. Colon Capsule Endoscopy (PillCam Colon, CCE) was compared to CSPY under routine screening conditions.MethodsWe performed a prospective, single-center pilot study at a University Hospital. Data were obtained from November 2007 until May 2008. Patients underwent CCE on Day 1 and CSPY on Day 2. Outcomes were evaluated regarding sensitivity and specificity of polyp detection rate, with a significance level set at >5 mm.Results59 individuals were included in this study, the results were evaluable in 56 patients (males 34, females 22; median age 59). CCE was complete in 36 subjects. Polyp detection rate for significant polyps was 11% on CSPY and 27% on CCE.6/56 (11%) patients had polyps on CSPY not detected on CCE (miss rate).Overall sensitivity was 79% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61 to 90), specificity was 54% (95% CI, 35 to 70), positive predictive value (PPV) was 63% and negative predictive value (NPV) was 71%. Adjusted to significance of findings, sensitivity was 50% (95% CI, 19 to 81), specificity was 76% (95% CI, 63 to 86), PPV was 20% and NPV was 93%.ConclusionIn comparison to the gold standard, the sensitivity of CCE for detection of relevant polyps is low, however, the high NPV supports its role as a possible screening tool.Trial RegistrationNCT00991003.