Explore the vast range of titles available.

INTRODUCTION:Intravenous corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment of patients hospitalized with acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC). However, 30%-40% of the patients are refractory to corticosteroids. We investigated whether addition of tofacitinib to corticosteroids improved the treatment responsiveness in patients with ASUC.METHODS:This single-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized adult patients with ASUC (defined by the Truelove Witts severity criteria) to receive either tofacitinib (10 mg thrice daily) or a matching placebo for 7 days while continuing intravenous corticosteroids (hydrocortisone 100 mg every 6 hours). The primary end point was response to treatment (decline in the Lichtiger index by >3 points and an absolute score <10 for 2 consecutive days without the need for rescue therapy) by day 7. The key secondary outcome was the cumulative probability of requiring initiation of infliximab or undergoing colectomy within 90 days following randomization. All analyses were performed in the intention-to-treat population.RESULTS:A total of 104 patients were randomly assigned to a treatment group (53 to tofacitinib and 51 to placebo). At day 7, response to treatment was achieved in 44/53 (83.01%) patients receiving tofacitinib vs 30/51 (58.82%) patients receiving placebo (odds ratio 3.42, 95% confidence interval 1.37-8.48, P = 0.007). The need for rescue therapy by day 7 was lower in the tofacitinib arm (odds ratio 0.27, 95% confidence interval 0.09-0.78, P = 0.01). The cumulative probability of need for rescue therapy at day 90 was 0.13 in patients who received tofacitinib vs 0.38 in patients receiving placebo (log-rank P = 0.003). Most of the treatment-related adverse effects were mild. One patient, receiving tofacitinib, developed dural venous sinus thrombosis.DISCUSSION:In patients with ASUC, combination of tofacitinib and corticosteroids improved treatment responsiveness and decreased the need for rescue therapy.

Background: Celiac Disease involves the small intestine patchily affecting more frequently the proximal small bowel but the histological changes have been observed till terminal ileum. Of late in addition to D2, the duodenal bulb (D1 region) biopsies have been found helpful in identifying a small group of patients with CD. Therefore, multiple site biopsies are recommended as histological changes are not uniform throughout small intestine. Methods: During this present 1.5 years prospective study, we evaluated 84 cases of suspected celiac disease with respect to the light microscopy (D1, D2, and D3 biopsy) and serology (anti tTg and or EMA). Histological examination was done according to Modified Marsh grading system. Results: Out of 84 cases with raised anti tTg, the segmental biopsies significantly increased the diagnostic accuracy from 39/44 cases (88.6%) to 43/44 cases (97.7%) and 44/44 cases (100%) when D2 alone, D1 + D2 and D1 + D2 + D3 biopsies were evaluated, respectively. Of the suspected cases of celiac disease patients (tTg > 10 ULN and associated weight loss, diarrhea), additional D3 biopsy increased the diagnostic yield by 2.1%, compared to D1, D2 region biopsy and 6.38% compared to standard D2 biopsy alone. Of the 28 cases (tTg > 10 times ULN + EMA positive and associated weight loss, diarrhea), the potential celiac disease (histologically Type 1/Normal) cases reduced from 28.5% (standard D2 region alone) to 21.4% and 17.8% when additional biopsies were taken from D1 region and D3 region, respectively, and additional D3 biopsy increased the diagnostic yield by 10.8% (compared to standard D2 biopsy alone) and 3.7% (compared to D1 and D2 biopsy). Conclusion: We believe multiple sites duodenal biopsies including D3 region biopsies might increase the diagnostic accuracy of adult celiac disease in addition to sensitive and specific serologic tests.

Eosinophilic ascites, a rare manifestation of eosinophilic gastroenteritis, is characterized by eosinophilic infiltration in the gastrointestinal tract and ascitic fluid. In this case, a 60-year-old male presented with abdominal pain and vomiting, with diagnostic challenges due to non-specific symptoms. The diagnosis was made based on history and eosinophil-rich ascites. Treatment with corticosteroids resulted in symptom improvement. This case emphasizes the importance of early recognition and prompt treatment to avoid unnecessary surgical intervention in patients with unexplained ascites.