Elfert, Khaled

Background and Aims: Upadacitinib, a selective janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor, and ustekinumab, an interleukin-12/23 inhibitor, are approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC). However, real-world data in patients with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-exposure are limited. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study in TriNetX US Collaborative Network. Adult patients with UC and prior anti-TNF exposure were identified. Patients who received upadacitinib or ustekinumab between April 2022 and August 2024 were stratified into two cohorts. Patients with Crohn’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis and ankylosing spondylitis were excluded. Propensity-score matching was performed to balance comorbidities, medications, and labs between the two cohorts. Study outcomes included rates of corticosteroid use, colectomies, change of therapy, hospital admissions or emergency department visit, and all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 724 patients in the upadacitinib cohort and 909 in the ustekinumab cohort met the inclusion criteria. After matching, 633 patients remained in each cohort, with balanced baseline characteristics. At 1-year follow-up, the rates of corticosteroid use were 40.1% in the upadacitinib group and 48.5% in the ustekinumab group (aOR= 0.71, 95% CI: 0.69-0.89), mainly driven by differences in oral corticosteroid use (aOR= 0.73, 95% CI: 0.58-0.91). All other outcomes were comparable between the two study groups. Conclusion: In patients with ulcerative colitis and prior anti-TNF exposure, upadacitinib was associated with lower oral corticosteroid use than ustekinumab over 1 year, with no significant differences in rates of colectomy, ED visits or hospitalizations. These findings suggest a potanial higher effectiveness of upadacitinib compared with ustekinumab and may help inform treatment selection in this population.

ABSTRACT Background Infection enteritis is associated with the development of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and functional dyspepsia. Aim This study aimed to examine the long‐term risk of IBS and functional dyspepsia, and associated health care utilisation following infection enteritis. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using TriNetX U.S. Network. Adults with infection enteritis were identified and matched to controls, balancing demographics and comorbidities. Primary outcomes were the risk of incident IBS and functional dyspepsia diagnoses at 1, 5, and 10 years. Secondary outcomes were rates of IBS‐ and functional dyspepsia‐related medications, endoscopy, abdominal imaging, and hospitalizations. Pathogen‐specific and multivariate analyses were performed to assess variations in IBS risk. Results After matching, 202,244 patients were identified in each study cohort. At 1 year of follow‐up, the infection enteritis cohort had higher rates of IBS (RR = 2.35; 95% CI: 2.14–2.59), functional dyspepsia (RR = 2.02; 95% CI: 1.84–2.22), use of IBS‐related medications (RR = 1.29; 95% CI: 1.26–1.31), functional dyspepsia‐related medications (RR = 1.56; 95% CI: 1.55–1.59), abdominal imaging (RR = 2.42; 95% CI: 2.29–2.54), and Oesophagogastroduodenoscopy/colonoscopy (RR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.50–1.65). These risks remained significantly higher in the IE cohort at 5 and 10 years. Salmonella/Shigella (RR = 6.48), and Giardia lamblia (RR = 5.05) had the highest risk of developing incident IBS. Conclusion Infection enteritis was associated with increased risk of IBS and functional dyspepsia, rates of related medication use, and greater healthcare utilisation.

ABSTRACT Background Early catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) improves outcomes, but the optimal timing, especially in heart failure (HF) subtypes, remains unclear. Objective To evaluate the impact of ablation timing on outcomes in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods We used the TriNetX database (2010–2024) to identify HF patients with AF who underwent ablation. Patients were classified as early ablation (≤ 1 year of first AF diagnosis) or delayed ablation (1–3 years), with propensity score matching (PSM) applied to balance the baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was AF recurrence, defined by repeat ablation, direct current cardioversion (DCCV), or antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) use after a 3‐month blanking period. Secondary outcomes included stroke, hospitalization, and mortality over 5 years. Results After PSM, delayed ablation was associated with higher AF recurrence in both HFrEF (HR = 1.28, p < 0.001) and HFpEF (HR = 1.21, p = 0.02), as seen in multivariate analysis. In HFrEF, delayed ablation was associated with higher incidence of re‐do ablation, AAD use, and DCCV, while in HFpEF, higher recurrence with delayed ablation was associated with increased AAD use. Both cohorts had similar stroke and mortality rates between early and delayed ablation. Conclusions Delayed ablation in HFrEF and HFpEF was linked to higher AF recurrence, driven by increased redo ablations, DCCV, AAD use in HFrEF, and higher AAD use in HFpEF. Stroke, HF hospitalization and mortality rates were similar, suggesting earlier ablation may enhance rhythm control over other outcomes.

Background: Early catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) improves outcomes, but the optimal timing, especially in heart failure (HF) subtypes, remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate the impact of ablation timing on outcomes in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods: We used the TriNetX database (2010–2024) to identify HF patients with AF who underwent ablation. Patients were classified as early ablation (≤1 year of first AF diagnosis) or delayed ablation (1–3 years), with propensity score matching (PSM) applied to balance the baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was AF recurrence, defined by repeat ablation, direct current cardioversion (DCCV), or antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) use after a 3-month blanking period. Secondary outcomes included stroke, hospitalization, and mortality over 5 years. Results: After PSM, delayed ablation was associated with higher AF recurrence in both HFrEF (HR 1.25, p < 0.001) and HFpEF (HR 1.27, p = 0.01), as seen in multivariate analysis. In HFrEF, delayed ablation was associated with higher incidence of re-do ablation, AAD use, and DCCV, while in HFpEF, higher recurrence with delayed ablation was associated with increased AAD use. Both cohorts had similar stroke and mortality rates between early and delayed ablation. Conclusions: Delayed ablation in HFrEF and HFpEF was linked to higher AF recurrence, driven by increased redo ablations, DCCV, AAD use in HFrEF, and higher AAD use in HFpEF. Stroke and mortality rates were similar, suggesting earlier ablation may enhance rhythm control without affecting long-term survival.

11pt, fleqn, a4paper, ]LegrandOrangeBook Background: Early catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) improves outcomes, but the optimal timing, especially in heart failure (HF) subtypes, remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate the impact of ablation timing on outcomes in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods: We used the TriNetX database (2010–2024) to identify HF patients with AF who underwent ablation. Patients were classified as early ablation (≤1 year of first AF diagnosis) or delayed ablation (1–3 years), with propensity score matching (PSM) applied to balance the baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was AF recurrence, defined by repeat ablation, direct current cardioversion (DCCV), or antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) use after a 3-month blanking period. Secondary outcomes included stroke, hospitalization, and mortality over 5 years. Results: After PSM, delayed ablation was associated with higher AF recurrence in both HFrEF (HR 1.25, p < 0.001) and HFpEF (HR 1.27, p = 0.01), as seen in multivariate analysis. In HFrEF, delayed ablation was associated with higher incidence of re-do ablation, AAD use, and DCCV, while in HFpEF, higher recurrence with delayed ablation was associated with increased AAD use. Both cohorts had similar stroke and mortality rates between early and delayed ablation. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed ablation in HFrEF and HFpEF was linked to higher AF recurrence, driven by increased redo ablations, DCCV, AAD use in HFrEF, and higher AAD use in HFpEF. Stroke and mortality rates were similar, suggesting earlier ablation may enhance rhythm control without affecting long-term survival. Condensed Abstract Delayed atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation was associated with higher (AF) recurrence in both HFrEF and HFpEF. In HFrEF, delayed ablation led to increased use of re-do ablation, cardioversion and antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs). In HFpEF, only AAD use was significantly higher with delayed ablation. Stroke and mortality rates were similar between early and delayed ablation groups.

Background and aims Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is an essential procedure for patients who require long-term enteral nutrition but are unable to eat orally. However, it carries a risk of bleeding, particularly in patients on anticoagulation or dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). This study aimed to assess the bleeding risk associated with continuing anticoagulation or DAPT during PEG placement. Methods Using the TriNetX US Collaborative Network Database, we analyzed four cohorts: patients on anticoagulants, patients not on anticoagulants, patients on DAPT, and patients on aspirin (ASP), focusing on gastrostomy-related bleeding within 7 and 30 days, along with secondary outcomes such as mortality and the need for blood transfusion or endoscopic reintervention. Results Our analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the 7-day bleeding risk between the anticoagulant and no anticoagulant groups. However, a higher 30-day bleeding risk was observed in the anticoagulant group (0.9 vs. 0.4%, P = 0.007). There was no significant difference in the incidence of severe bleeding events requiring endoscopic intervention or blood transfusion. In addition, the difference in the bleeding risk between the DAPT and ASP groups was not statistically significant within 7 and 30 days. Conclusion These findings suggest that while anticoagulant use increases the risk of minor post-PEG bleeding, it does not lead to a higher incidence of severe bleeding. Additionally, the continuation of DAPT was not associated with statistically significant increase in bleeding risk. This study provides valuable insights into the management of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing PEG.

Abstract Background Studies evaluating the risk of post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) after colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are limited. Methods This retrospective cohort study utilized the U.S. Collaborative Network to assess the risk of PPB after colorectal EMR in patients with CKD compared to controls. Using one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM), the primary outcome measured was PPB within 30 days after colorectal EMR. The PPB risk was further stratified by CKD severity: non-advanced CKD and advanced CKD. Results After PSM, each cohort included 7,460 patients. Overall, CKD was associated with increased risk of PPB following colorectal EMR (5.5% vs. 4%, odds ratio [OR] 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19–1.61, p < 0.001). The PPB risk was significantly higher in patients with advanced CKD (8.1% vs, 4.6%, OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.43–2.34, p < 0.001), while those with non-advanced CKD showed modest increase in risk of PPB (4.7% vs. 3.9%, OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.001–1.46, p = 0.049). Conclusion Patients with CKD had higher risk of PPB than patients without CKD, but absolute risk remained low. The PPB risk was notably increased in patients with advanced CKD. Optimizing patients with CKD, especially advanced CKD, before colorectal EMR and monitoring for post-procedure bleeding remains important.

INTRODUCTION: Data on the risk of post-polypectomy bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in patients with cirrhosis are limited. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used the US Collaborative Network to assess post-polypectomy bleeding risk after colorectal EMR in patients with cirrhosis compared with controls. Using one-to-one propensity score matching, the primary outcome measured was bleeding within 30 days post-EMR. The bleeding risk was further stratified by cirrhosis severity (compensated and decompensated). RESULTS: After propensity score matching, each cohort included 2,381 patients. Patients with cirrhosis had a higher risk of post-polypectomy bleeding (odds ratio [OR] 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–1.82, P = 0.02). However, endoscopic reinterventions for hemostasis were similar between cirrhosis and control cohorts (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.71–2.05, P = 0.50). The post-polypectomy bleeding risk was significantly higher in patients with decompensated cirrhosis (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.12–2.42, P = 0.01), while those with compensated cirrhosis showed no increased risk of post-polypectomy bleeding (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.85–1.54, P = 0.37). DISCUSSION: The post-polypectomy bleeding risk was higher in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, while the bleeding risk was not increased in those with compensated disease. Optimizing patients with cirrhosis, especially with decompensated disease, before colorectal EMR and monitoring for post-procedure bleeding remain important. A conservative, supportive approach to managing bleeding in patients with cirrhosis may be as effective as in those without cirrhosis.