Nové přístupy u pacientů trpících nespecifickými střevními záněty
Autoři:
I. Romanko 1; M. Lukas 2; M. Bortlík 2,3
Působiště autorů:
Joint Admission of the General University Hospital for Persons with Medical Problems, Prague
1; IBD Clinical and Research Centre, ISCARE Lighthouse and 1st Medical Faculty of Charles University, Prague
2; Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Medical Faculty, Charles University and Central Military Hospital, Prague
3
Vyšlo v časopise:
Gastroent Hepatol 2015; 69(5): 441-448
Kategorie:
IBD: přehledová práce
doi:
https://doi.org/10.14735/amgh2015441
Souhrn
Střevní zánětlivá onemocnění (IBD – inflammatory bowel diseases) jsou chronické, v současnosti nevyléčitelné, nemoci znamenající pro pacienty celoživotní zátěž. Jsou typické střídavým průběhem remise a relapsů, což ovlivňuje nejenom celkový zdravotní stav, ale také kvalitu života (QoL – Quality of life) pacientů. Aktivita nemoci a QoL jsou důležitými aspekty při sledování průběhu nemoci a měly by být hodnoceny při kontrolách specialistou. Dlouhodobá dispenzarizace pacientů je nevyhnutelná, ale může být pro některé pacienty komplikovaná z důvodu nedostatku IBD center, dlouhým cestovním vzdálenostem nebo nedostatku volných termínů k objednání. Využití informačních technologií v medicíně (telemedicína) může být nápomocné při sledování průběhu IBD. Nástroje k hodnocení aktivity nemoci a QoL mohou být ve formě internetových dotazníků nebo dotazníků pro mobilní telefony vyplňovány pacienty z domova a návštěva lékaře se doporučí podle výsledků. Tím dochází k přerozdělení zdravotní péče komplikovanějším případům. Takový způsob může ušetřit čas i prostředky zdravotníků a těch pacientů, kteří jsou dlouhodobě v remisi. Článek shrnuje invazivní (endoskopie) a neinvazivní (fekální kalprotektin, dotazníky) nástroje pro hodnocení QoL a aktivity nemoci a poukazuje na možnosti využití telemedicíny v klinické praxi.
Klíčová slova:
Crohnova nemoc – ulcerózní kolitida – aktivita nemoci – kvalita života – fekální kalprotektin – telemedicína
Autoři deklarují, že v souvislosti s předmětem studie nemají žádné komerční zájmy.
Redakční rada potvrzuje, že rukopis práce splnil ICMJE kritéria pro publikace zasílané do biomedicínských časopisů.
Doručeno:
22. 9. 2015
Přijato:
29. 9. 2015
Zdroje
1. Vora P, Shih DQ, McGovern DP et al. Current concepts on the immunopathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease. Front Biosci (Elite Ed) 2012; 4: 1451–1477.
2. Yoshida EM. The Crohn’s Disease Activity Index, its derivatives and the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire: a review of instruments to assess Crohn’s disease. Can J Gastroenterol 1999; 13(1): 65–73.
3. Ogorek CP, Fisher RS. Differentiation between Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. Med Clin North Am 1994; 78(6): 1249–1258.
4. van Sommeren S, Janse M, Karjalainen J et al. Extraintestinal manifestations and complications in inflammatory bowel disease: from shared genetics to shared biological pathways. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2014; 20(6): 987–994. doi: 10.1097/MIB.0000000000000032.
5. Loftus EV Jr. Clinical epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease: Incidence, prevalence, and environmental influences. Gastroenterology 2004; 126(6): 1504–1517.
6. Burisch J, Munkholm P. The epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease. Scand J Gastroenterol 2015; 50(8): 942–951. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2015.1014407.
7. Best WR, Becktel JM, Singleton JW et al. Development of a Crohns disease activity index. National Cooperative Crohns Disease Study. Gastroenterology 1976; 70(3): 439–444.
8. Harvey RF, Bradshaw JM et al. A simple index of Crohn’s disease activity. Lancet 1980; 1(8167): 514.
9. Stenke E, Hussey S. Ulcerative colitis: management in adults, children and young people (NICE Clinical Guideline CG166). Arch dis Child Educ Pract Ed 2014; 99(5): 194–197. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-305512.
10. Powell-Tuck J, Brown RL, Lennard-Jones JE. A comparison of oral prednisone given as single or multiple daily doses for active proctocolitis. Scand J Gastroenterol 1978; 13(7): 833–837.
11. Walmsley RS, Ayres RC, Pounder RE et al. A simple clinical colitis activity index. Gut 1998; 43(1): 29–32.
12. Seo M, Okada M, Yao T et al. An index of disease activity in patients with ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol 1992; 87(8): 971–976.
13. Sutherland LR, Martin F, Greer S et al. 5-Aminosalicylic acid enema in the treatment of distal ulcerative colitis, proctosigmoiditis, and proctitis. Gastroenterology 1987; 92: 1894–1898.
14. Schroeder KW, Tremaine WJ, Ilstrup DM. Coated oral 5-aminosalicylic acid therapy for mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. A randomized study. N Engl J Med 1987; 317(26): 1625–1629.
15. Annese V, Daperno M, Rutter MD et al. European evidence based consensus for endoscopy in inflammatory bowel disease. J Crohns Colitis 2013; 7(12): 982–1018. doi: 10.1016/j.crohns.2013.09.016.
16. Sauter B, Beglinger C, Girardin M et al. Monitoring disease activity and progression in Crohn’s disease. A Swiss perspective on the IBD ahead ’optimised monitoring’ recommendations. Digestion 2014; 89(4): 299–309. doi: 10.1159/000360283.
17. Garrett JW, Drossman DA. Health status in inflammatory bowel disease. Biological and behavioral considerations. Gastroenterology 1990; 99(1): 90–96.
18. Guyatt G, Mitchell A, Irvine EJ et al. A new measure of health status for clinical trials in inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 1989; 96(3): 804–810.
19. Jowett SL, Seal CJ, Barton JR et al. The short inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire is reliable and responsive to clinically important change in ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96(10): 2921–2928.
20. Judd TA, Day AS, Lemberg DA et al. Update of fecal markers of inflammation in inflammatory bowel disease. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 26(10): 1493–1499. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06846.x.
21. Desai D, Faubion WA, Sandborn WJ. Review article: biological activity markers in inflammatory bowel disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007; 25(3): 247–255.
22. Røseth AG, Schmidt PN, Fagerhol MK. Correlation between faecal excretion of indium-111-labelled granulocytes and calprotectin, a granulocyte marker protein, in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Scand J Gastroenterol 1999; 34(1): 50–54.
23. Moum B, Jahnsen J, Bernklev T. Fecal calprotectin variability in Crohn’s disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2010; 16(7): 1091–1092. doi: 10.1002/ibd.21136.
24. Joishy M, Davies I, Ahmed M et al. Fecal calprotectin and lactoferrin as noninvasive markers of pediatric inflammatory bowel disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2009; 48(1): 48–54. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0b013e31816533d3.
25. Rogler G, Aldeguer X, Kruis W et al. Concept for a rapid point-of-care calprotectin diagnostic test for diagnosis and disease activity monitoring in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: expert clinical opinion. J Crohns Colitis 2013; 7(8): 670–677. doi: 10.1016/j.crohns.2013.02.014.
26. Walker TR, Land ML, Kartashov A et al. Fecal lactoferrin is a sensitive and specific marker of disease activity in children and young adults with inflammatory bowel disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2007; 44(4): 414–422.
27. Schröder O, Naumann M, Shastri Y et al. Prospective evaluation of faecal neutrophil-derived proteins in identifying intestinal inflammation: combination of parameters does not improve diagnostic accuracy of calprotectin. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007; 26(7): 1035–1042.
28. Røseth AG, Aadland E, Grzyb K. Normalization of faecal calprotectin: a predictor of mucosal healing in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Scand J Gastroenterol 2004; 39(10): 1017–1020.
29. D’Incà R, Dal Pont E, Di Leo V et al. Calprotectin and lactoferrin in the assessment of intestinal inflammation and organic disease. Int J Colorectal Dis 2007; 22(4): 429–437.
30. Sipponen T, Savilahti E, Kolho KL et al. Crohn’s disease activity assessed by fecal calprotectin and lactoferrin: correlation with Crohn’s disease activity index and endoscopic findings. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2008; 14(1): 40–46.
31. Schoepfer AM, Beglinger C, Straumann A et al. Fecal calprotectin correlates more closely with the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn’s disease (SES-CD) than CRP, blood leukocytes, and the CDAI. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105(1): 162–169. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2009.545.
32. Røseth AG, Aadland E, Grzyb K. Normalization of faecal calprotectin: a predictor of mucosal healing in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Scand J Gastroenterol 2004; 39(10): 1017–1020.
33. Sipponen T, Bjorkesten CG, Farkkila M et al. Faecal calprotectin and lactoferrin are reliable surrogate markers of endoscopic response during Crohn’s disease treatment. Scand J Gastroenterol 2010; 45(3): 325–331. doi: 10.3109/00365520903483650.
34. van Rheenen PF, Van de Vijver E, Fidler V. Faecal calprotectin for screening of patients with suspected inflammatory bowel disease: diagnostic meta-analysis. BMJ 2010; 341:c3369. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c3369.
35. Costa F, Mumolo MG, Ceccarelli L et al. Calprotectin is a stronger predictive marker of relapse in ulcerative colitis than in Crohn’s disease. Gut 2005; 54(3); 364–368.
36. Orlando A, Modesto I, Castiglione F et al. The role of calprotectin in predicting endoscopic postsurgical recurrence in asymptomatic Crohn’s disease: a comparison with ultrasound. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2006; 10(1): 17–22.
37. D’Haens G, Ferrante M, Vermeire S et al. Fecal calprotectin is a surrogate marker for endoscopic lesions in inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012; 18(12); 2218–2224. doi: 10.1002/ibd.22917.
38. Aggio R, Probert C. Future methods for the diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease. Dig Dis 2014; 32(4): 463–467. doi: 10.1159/000358153.
39. Bodelier A, Smolinska A, Dalinga J et al. Volatile organic compounds in breath as new test for Crohn's disease. United European Gastroenterology Journal 2013; 1 (Suppl 1): A36.
40. Surti B, Spiegel B, Ippoliti A et al. Assessing health status in inflammatory bowel disease using a novel single-item numeric rating scale. Dig Dis Sci 2013; 58(5): 1313–1321. doi: 10.1007/s10620-012-2500-1.
41. Bodger K, Ormerod C, Shackcloth D et al. Development and validation of a rapid, generic measure of disease control from patient’s perspective: the IBD-control questionnaire. Gut 2014; 63(7): 1092–1102. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-305600.
42. Keefer L, Kiebles JL, Taft TH et al. The role of self-efficacy in inflammatory bowel disease management: preliminary validation of a disease-specificmeasure. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2011; 17(2): 614–620. doi: 10.1002/ibd.21314.
43. Alrubaiy L, Rikaby I, Dodds P et al. Systematic review of health-related quality of life measures for imflammatory bowel diseases. J Crohns Colitis 2015; 284–292. doi: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjv002.
44. Capalbo SM, Heggem CN. Valuing rural health care: issues of access and quality. Am J Agri Econ 1999; 81(3): 674–679.
45. Berman M, Fenaughty A. Technology and managed care: patient benefits of telemedicine in a rural health care network. Health Econ 2005; 14(6): 559–573.
46. Krier M, Kaltenbach T, McQuaid K. Potential use of telemedicine to provide outpatient care for inflammatory bowel disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106(12): 2063–2067. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2011.329.
47. Elkjaer M. E-health: web-guided therapy and disease self-management in ulcerative colitis. Impact on disease outcome, quality of life and compliance. Dan Med J 2012; 59(7): B4478.
48. Huang VW, Reich KM, Fedorak RN. Distance management of inflammatory bowel disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20(3): 829–842. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i3.829.
49. Kim ES, Park KS, Cho KB et al. Development of a Web-based, self-reporting symptom diary for Crohn’s disease, and its correlation with the Crohn’s disease activity index: web-based, self-reporting symptom diary for Crohn’s disease. J Crohns Colitis 2014; S1873–9946(14)00268–2. doi: 10.1016/j.crohns.2014.09.003.
50. Degens J, Romberg-Camps M, Cilissen M et al. Results from a feasibility study with the telemedicine tool myIBDcoach in the Netherlands. J Crohns Colitis 2014; 8 (Suppl 1): S58. doi: 10.1016/S1873-9946(14)60115-X.
51. Atreja A, Khan S, Rogers JD et al. Impact of the Mobile healthPROMISE platform on the quality of care and quality of life in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: study protocol of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. JMIR Res Protoc 2015; 4(1): e23. doi: 10.2196/resprot.4042.
Štítky
Dětská gastroenterologie Gastroenterologie a hepatologie Chirurgie všeobecnáČlánek vyšel v časopise
Gastroenterologie a hepatologie
2015 Číslo 5
- Metamizol jako analgetikum první volby: kdy, pro koho, jak a proč?
- Cinitaprid – nové bezpečné prokinetikum s odlišným mechanismem účinku
- Horní limit denní dávky vitaminu D: Jaké množství je ještě bezpečné?
Nejčtenější v tomto čísle
- Endoskopická histologizace diminutivních polypů tračníku. Jsme připraveni na změnu?
- Pneumoperitoneum
- Domáca parenterálna výživa – význam a využitie v klinickej praxi
- Screeningové kolonoskopie u seniorů starších 70 let