Each individual is endowed with a unique gut microbiota (GM) footprint that mediates numerous host-related physiological functions, such as nutrient metabolism, maintenance of the structural integrity of the gut mucosal barrier, immunomodulation, and protection against microbial pathogens. Because of increased scientific interest in the GM, its central role in the pathophysiology of many intestinal and extraintestinal conditions has been recognized. Given the close relationship between the gastrointestinal tract and the liver, many pathological processes have been investigated in the light of a microbial-centered hypothesis of hepatic damage. In this review we introduce to neophytes the vast world of gut microbes, including prevalent bacterial distribution in healthy individuals, how the microbiota is commonly analyzed, and the current knowledge of the role of GM in liver disease pathophysiology. Also, we highlight the potentials and downsides of GM-based therapy.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most frequent gastrointestinal disorders. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective in healing lesions and improving symptoms in most cases, although up to 40% of GERD patients do not respond adequately to PPI therapy. Refractory GERD (rGERD) is one of the most challenging problems, given its impact on the quality of life and consumption of health care resources. The definition of rGERD is a controversial topic as it has not been unequivocally established. Indeed, some patients unresponsive to PPIs who experience symptoms potentially related to GERD may not have GERD; in this case the definition could be replaced with “reflux-like PPI-refractory symptoms.” Patients with persistent reflux-like symptoms should undergo a diagnostic workup aimed at finding objective evidence of GERD through endoscopic and pH-impedance investigations. The management strategies regarding rGERD, apart from a careful check of patient's compliance with PPIs, a possible change in the timing of their administration and the choice of a PPI with a different metabolic pathway, include other pharmacologic treatments. These include histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), alginates, antacids and mucosal protective agents, potassium competitive acid blockers (PCABs), prokinetics, gamma aminobutyric acid-B (GABA-B) receptor agonists and metabotropic glutamate receptor-5 (mGluR5) antagonists, and pain modulators. If there is no benefit from medical therapy, but there is objective evidence of GERD, invasive antireflux options should be evaluated after having carefully explained the risks and benefits to the patient. The most widely performed invasive antireflux option remains laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS), even if other, less invasive, interventions have been suggested in the last few decades, including endoscopic transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF), magnetic sphincter augmentation (LINX) or radiofrequency therapy (Stretta). Due to the different mechanisms underlying rGERD, the most effective strategy can vary, and it should be tailored to each patient. The aim of this paper is to review the different management options available to successfully deal with rGERD.

No abstract

Background and aims Restructuring activities have been necessary during the lockdown phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Few data are available on the post-lockdown phase in terms of health-care procedures in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care, and no data are available specifically from IBD units. We aimed to investigate how IBD management was restructured during the lockdown phase, the impact of the restructuring on standards of care and how Italian IBD units have managed post-lockdown activities. Methods A web-based online survey was conducted in two phases (April and June 2020) among the Italian Group for IBD affiliated units within the entire country. We investigated preventive measures, the possibility of continuing scheduled visits/procedures/therapies because of COVID-19 and how units resumed activities in the post-lockdown phase. Results Forty-two referral centres participated from all over Italy. During the COVID-19 lockdown, 36% of first visits and 7% of follow-up visits were regularly done, while >70% of follow-up scheduled visits and 5% of first visits were done virtually. About 25% of scheduled endoscopies and bowel ultrasound scans were done. More than 80% of biological therapies were done as scheduled. Compared to the pre-lockdown situation, 95% of centres modified management of outpatient activity, 93% of endoscopies, 59% of gastrointestinal ultrasounds and 33% of biological therapies. Resumption of activities after the lockdown phase may take three to six months to normalize. Virtual clinics, implementation of IBD pathways and facilities seem to be the main factors to improve care in the future. Conclusion Italian IBD unit restructuring allowed quality standards of care during the COVID-19 pandemic to be maintained. A return to normal appears to be feasible and achievable relatively quickly. Some approaches, such as virtual clinics and identified IBD pathways, represent a valid starting point to improve IBD care in the post-COVID-19 era.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), the most common mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal tract, are characterized by activating mutations in KIT or PDGFRA genes. The vast majority of GISTs are sporadic, but rare hereditary forms have been reported, often featuring multifocality and younger age of onset. We here report the identification of a novel kindred affected by familial GIST caused by a KIT germline mutation in exon 13 (N655K). No family affected by hereditary GIST due to this KIT variant has been reported in literature so far. We were able to track the mutation in three members of the family (proband, mother, and second-degree cousin), all affected by multiple GISTs. Due to its rarity, the N655K variant is poorly characterized. We conducted in vitro drug sensitivity assays that indicated that most tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) currently included in the therapeutic armamentarium for GISTs have a limited inhibitory activity toward this mutation. However, when compared to a classical imatinib-resistant KIT mutation (T670I), N655K was slightly more sensitive to imatinib, and encouraging responses were observed with last-generation TKIs.