Category Archives: Gastroenterology

Mediterranean Diet’s Impact on Crohn’s Disease Outcomes

Posted on by

Methods: In this prospective cohort study, consecutive adults (n=271) from 2 large IBD centers in Israel with newly diagnosed CD were recruited and followed prospectively. MED adherence was assessed by repeated food frequency questionnaires (FFQs) using a predefined inflammatory bowel disease Mediterranean diet score (IBDMED score), alongside validated MED adherence screeners. Crohn’s disease activity index (CDAI), C-reactive protein, fecal calprotectin, and microbial composition (16S-ribosomal RNA sequencing) were assessed each visit. Baseline serum and fecal samples were analyzed for targeted quantitative metabolomics.

Demographic/Clinical data indicate 68% received biologics and 40% receiving immunomodulators. 32% received 5-ASA medications (despite lack of proven efficacy)

Key findings:

  • Adherence to MED was associated with a noncomplicated CD course, and inversely correlated with CDAI, fecal calprotectin, C-reactive protein, and microbial dysbiosis index (all P < .05)
  • Increasing adherence to MED over time correlated with reduced CDAI and inflammatory markers (P < .05)
  • Adherence to MED correlated with a beneficial microbial cluster of commensals and short-chain fatty acid producers including Faecalibacterium, and with plant metabolites, vitamin derivatives, and amino acids 
  • Adherence to MED in the cohort group was comparable to the general non-IBD population in Israel

Limitations: This was an observational study rather than an interventional study with a control group. Thus, the results could be influenced by reverse causality

In the associated commentary by Abreu et al, it is noted that in Israel, “MED is more commonplace than in the US and other Western countries…Godny et al found that IBD patients had an average MED adherence score of 7.8, which is similar to that of the general non-IBD population in Israel; in contrast, the average MED adherence score in the US is 4–5.Godny et al’s CD patients consumed an average of 21 g of fiber per day; in a study we just completed, American CD patients consumed less than half that amount.13 Indeed, the baseline diets of American IBD patients are characterized by high amounts of saturated animal fat and almost no fresh fruits and vegetables…Another difference between the Israeli population and the typical American population is body mass index (BMI). The average BMI of patients in this study was 21.9 kg/m2 (interquartile range 20–25.3 kg/m2). This contrasts with the average BMI of the general US population of 30 kg/m2.”

My take: This study shows an association between MED diet and better outcomes/less complications in adults with Crohn’s disease. Eating a good diet is an important part of treatment.

Additional notes on dietary scores: “The IBDMED screener positively scored high consumption of MED-recommended dietary components such as fruits, vegetables, olive oil, legumes, nuts and seeds, and fish. It also positively scored low consumption of MED non-recommended dietary components such as red and processed meat, soft drinks, and sweets. To this we added several dietary features based on previous data associated with microbial composition and function. These included a positive score for plant diversity27 by scoring for different colors in the diet, consumption of fermented foods28 (specifically yogurt), and inclusion of starchy vegetables like potato in the whole grain category to promote diversity in the carbohydrate-rich food group, as well as support butyrate producers as we had previously shown.29 In addition, we aimed to positively score for relatively low UPF intake. To this end, we evaluated the average intake of sweets, snacks, sweet and savory pastries, soft drinks, and foods and drinks containing artificial sweeteners.”

Related blog posts:

Also, from Kim Beall, Cofounder and Managing Director of Nutritional Therapy for IBD:

“If you haven’t been to the website recently, we have expanded the recipe database to over 1,000 recipes with many filterable aspects and we’ve just released a new nutrition tool, the IBD Nutrition Navigator to facilitate nutrition conversations between providers and patients to find the right nutritional starting point. This is a project led by Dr. Ananthakrishnan and a dedicated team of pediatric and adult medical advisors in a two year long development process. Many have told us this is a useful tool particularly for those less familiar with nutrition in IBD. We’re excited about it’s potential to integrate nutrition in practice, with “an option for every patient”. We appreciate your support in sharing our information, tools, and resources to advance IBD nutrition care.” Here’s the link to their website:

Risks of GLP-1RA Therapy Related to Endoscopy: Three Studies and GLP1RA Nutrition Pearls

Posted on by

A recent Nutrition Pearls with one of our nutritionists, Baily Koch, as a moderator was very good: Christy Figueredo – Navigating GLP-1 Use in Pediatrics (episode 33, 58 minutes)

A Faccisorusso et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025; 23: 715-725. Open access! Effects of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists on Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Meta-Analysis

This is one of three articles discussing the issue of GLP-1RAs and potential complications with upper endoscopy. Faccisourruso et al performed a meta-analysis that included 13 studies (of 177 studies) involving a total of 84,065 patients.

Key findings:

  • Patients receiving GLP-1RA therapy exhibited significantly higher rates of retained gastric contents (RGC) (OR, 5.56)
  • Rates of aborted and repeated procedures were higher in the GLP-1RA user group. The absolute risk of aborted procedure was 1% in GLP-1RA users compared to 0.3% in non-users. The absolute risk of a repeated procedure was 2% vs 1% respectively.
  • No significant differences were found in AE and aspiration rates between the 2 groups (OR, 4.04 and OR, 1.75 respectively). The absolute risk of aspiration was 0.3% in GLP1-RA users compared to 0.2% in non-GLP1-RA group
  • Adverse events were higher in GLP-1RA users (0.3%) compared to non-users (0.1%)

In their discussion, the authors note that an “individualized approach based on the indication of GLP-1RA use (withholding the drug in patients with diabetes could lead to more harm)…a potential stragegy could be to place patients on a liquid diet the day before endoscopy, thus prolonging the duration of fasting for solid for at least 12 hours.”

The related articles:

My take: The totality of these studies confirms the increased risk of retained gastric contents in patients receiving GLP-1RAs. This in turn increases the need to abort/reschedule cases and may result in very a low increased risk of aspiration. To mitigate this risk, it may be sufficient to implement a liquid diet the day before endoscopy (avoiding solid foods for at least 12 hours prior to endoscopy). This is in agreement with the recent AGA Rapid Clinical Practice Update (see post below).

Related article on utility of GLP-1RAs: David Kessler, NY Times  5/7/25: In a World of Addictive Foods, We Need GLP-1s

“Like millions of others, I was caught between what the food industry has done to make the American diet unhealthy and addictive and what my metabolism could accommodate.

We may now be at the brink of reclaiming our health. New and highly effective anti-obesity medications known as GLP-1s have revolutionized our understanding of weight loss and of obesity itself. These drugs alone are not a panacea for the obesity crisis that has engulfed the nation, and we should not mistake them for one. But their effectiveness underscores the fact that being overweight or obese was never the result of a lack of willpower…

GLP-1s are revolutionary drugs that can drastically reduce caloric intake and improve health in a way I didn’t expect I would ever see. Now we need to complete that revolution by taking on the food industry and its engineered foods that are contributing to some of the most harmful health issues America faces today.”

Related blog posts:

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

VISION 5-Year Study Results: Safety of Vonoprazan in Erosive Esophagitis

Posted on by

N Uemura et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025; 23: 748-757. Open Access! Vonoprazan as a Long-term Maintenance Treatment for Erosive Esophagitis: VISION, a 5-Year, Randomized, Open-label Study

Background: Potassium-competitive acid blockers, such as vonoprazan, provide more potent gastric acid suppression than proton pump inhibitors. However, long-term safety data are lacking for vonoprazan in patients with healed erosive esophagitis. This study with 208 patients provides long-term data on the use of a vonoprazan.

Methods: Open-label study. Patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) received induction therapy (once daily vonoprazan 20 mg or lansoprazole 30 mg; ≤8 weeks). Those with healed EE received maintenance therapy (once daily vonoprazan 10 mg or lansoprazole 15 mg) for 260 weeks (2:1). 

Key findings–Adverse effects:

  • No malignant alterations or gastric neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) were observed; there was 1 adenoma in each group
  • At week 260, significantly more patients taking vonoprazan vs lansoprazole had parietal cell hyperplasia (97.1% vs 86.5%) and foveolar hyperplasia (14.7% vs 1.9%)
  • proportions of patients with ECL cell hyperplasia (4.9% vs 7.7%) and G-cell hyperplasia (85.3% vs 76.9%) were similar
  • Median serum gastrin levels were higher with vonoprazan treatment vs lansoprazole (625 pg/mL vs 200 pg/mL)

Key finding –Efficacy:

  • Overall, the cumulative EE recurrence over 260 weeks was lower in the vonoprazan group (10.8% ) vs the lansoprazole group (38.0%) (P = .001)  

Discussion Points:

  • “Annual endoscopies and biopsies performed in the VISION study are considered objective approaches for detecting upper gastrointestinal diseases and variable lesions, as well as gastric mucosa morphological changes in areas without endoscopically apparent lesions…Although the proportions of patients with parietal cell protrusion and foveolar hyperplasia were higher in the vonoprazan group than in the lansoprazole group over 5 years, the clinical significance of these findings is unclear.”
  • “The safety profiles of vonoprazan and lansoprazole were also comparable, suggesting that long-term use of vonoprazan is as safe as PPIs.”

My take: This study provides some reassurance regarding the risk of using vonoprazan & other potassium-competitive acid blockers. The benefits of controlling erosive esophagitis may outweigh potential safety risks of long-term use. Nevertheless, it will be a while before this class of medications is used extensively in the pediatric age group.

Related blog posts:

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

Head-to-Head: Tirzepatide Outperforms Semaglutide

Posted on by

LA Aronne et al. NEJM 2025; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2416394. Tirzepatide as Compared with Semaglutide for the Treatment of Obesity

Methods: In this phase 3b, open-label, controlled “SURMOUNT-5” trial, adult participants (n=751) with obesity but without type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive the maximum tolerated dose of tirzepatide (10 mg or 15 mg) or the maximum tolerated dose of semaglutide (1.7 mg or 2.4 mg) subcutaneously once weekly for 72 weeks

Key findings:

Discussion Points:

“With both treatments in our trial, as weight reduction increased, greater improvements occurred in cardiometabolic risk factors, including blood pressure, glycemia, and lipid levels, which is consistent with the findings in previous reports.17 The mean differences between tirzepatide and semaglutide in the cardiometabolic risk factors may be clinically relevant considering that reductions in systolic blood pressure of 2 to 5 mm Hg have been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events.”

” As typically observed with incretin-based therapies, gastrointestinal adverse events were predominantly mild to moderate in severity, occurred mostly during dose escalation, and led to treatment discontinuation more often with semaglutide than with tirzepatide.”

My take (borrowed from the authors):  “Treatment with tirzepatide, a dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist, was superior to treatment with semaglutide, a selective GLP-1 receptor agonist, with respect to reduction in body weight and waist circumference.”

Related blog posts:

Upadacitinib’s Effectiveness for Perianal Fistulizing Crohn’s Disease

Posted on by

J-F Colombel et al. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Volume 23, Issue 6, 1019 – 1029. Open Access! Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib for Perianal Fistulizing Crohn’s Disease: A Post Hoc Analysis of 3 Phase 3 Trials

Methods: This post hoc analysis evaluated upadacitinib outcomes in patients with fistulizing disease in the following studies: phase 3 induction (U-EXCEL, U-EXCEED) and maintenance (U-ENDURE) trials. It was noted that there were 1021 patients in U-EXCEL and U-EXCEED; 143 (14.0%) had any fistulas at baseline (66 draining). Most (n = 128) had perianal fistulas (56 draining).

Key findings:

  • Fistulizing disease (primarily perianal) treated with upadacitinib achieved higher rates of resolution of drainage, closure of external openings, clinical remission, and endoscopic response vs placebo
These slides from Figure 1 show the resolution of drainage in perianal draining fistulas, closure of external perianal fistula openings, and closure of external openings for any fistula at week 12 of the induction trials and week 52 of the maintenance trial.

Discussion points:

  • Patients with draining fistulas often experience higher disease burden
  • Most patients in U-EXCEL and U-EXCEED had failed at least 2 prior biologic treatments (which often included anti-TNF therapy), reflecting a more refractory and difficult-to-treat population in CD
  • Despite the presence of perianal disease, patients with fistulizing CD treated with upadacitinib showed concurrent improvements in CD symptoms (CDAI, SF, and APS), luminal disease (endoscopic response and SES-CD), and markers of inflammation

My take: This study shows that upadacitinib is more effective than placebo; however, the majority of patients continued with ongoing perianal disease.

Related blog posts:

Increase in Irritable Bowel Syndrome During COVID Pandemic

Posted on by

CV Almario et al. Neurogastroenterology and Motility; https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.70020. Trends in Prevalence of Rome IV Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results From a Nationally Representative Sample of Over 160,000 People in the US

Methods: From May 2020 to May 2022, the authors performed a series of cross-sectional online surveys among a representative sample of adults ≥ 18 years old in the US (n=160,154). We administered Rome IV gastroduodenal and bowel DGBI questionnaires.

Key findings:

  •  During the COVID-19 pandemic, the prevalence of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) increased from 6.1% [May 2020] to 11.0% [May 2022]
  • In addition, the prevalence of chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) increased mildly from 6.0% [May 2020] to 6.4% [May 2022]
  • No changes in prevalence were seen for the other examined gastroduodenal and bowel disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI)

My take: This study identified increases in the prevalence of IBS during COVID. Increases in IBS following other enteric infections (eg. norovirus, shigella, campylobacter) has been shown previously as well.

Related blog posts:

Rice Fields in Northern Thailand

David Rubin: Linking Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Mental Health Through the Gut Microbiome

Posted on by

At this year’s DDW, Dr. David Rubin discussed the connection between inflammatory bowel disease and mental health via the microbiome. He shared his slides: Linking Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Mental Health Through the Gut Microbiome

Here are 15 of his 37 slides:

Safe for Patients with Celiac Disease to Kiss after Partner’s Gluten Ingestion

Posted on by

An excerpt from News Medical:

Researchers recruited 10 couples, each with one partner who has celiac disease, for a two-part study. In each session, the non-celiac partner ate 10 saltine crackers, and then the couple kissed for 10 seconds. In one session, the partners waited five minutes before the kiss, and in the other, they drank 4 ounces of water before kissing…

Although gluten was still found in saliva after kissing a partner who had consumed gluten and then had a glass of water, in all cases the amount was less than 20 parts per million, the level allowed in gluten-free products, which is considered safe.

“Patients with celiac disease can be more relaxed, knowing that the risk of gluten cross-contact through kissing a partner who has consumed gluten can be brought down to safe levels if food is followed by a small glass of water.”

From NBC article:

In the first scenario — waiting five minutes before kissing — two of the celiac participants had more than 20 parts per million of gluten in their saliva sample. 

In the scenario in which non-celiac partners drank 4 ounces of water before the kiss, everyone’s saliva tests contained fewer than 20 ppm of gluten. 

My take: Sounds like a fun study. Best to drink water before kissing your partner who has celiac disease.

Reference: Anne Lee. DDW Abstract Mo1242, 5/5/25: “Assessing gluten transfer via kissing; a prospective study of celiac-discordant couples”

Infection Risks with Biologic Switches: Findings from Recent Study

Posted on by

Briefly noted: AJ Kruger et al. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2025. Biologic switch timing and risk of infection in patients with ulcerative colitis/Crohn’s disease: a retrospective study

Methods: This was a “real-world practice” retrospective study (2017-2022) with 11,992 adult patients who were newly initiating a biologic therapy for UC/CD. 1,293 patients underwent a biologic switch, 64.2% of which were considered an overlapping switch (OS).

Key findings:

  • Adjusted incidence ratio IR) per 1,000 person years, for any infection, were comparable across switching groups. No significant differences in aHR of infections were found between OS and NOS [any infection aHR: 1.40, P=.17; serious infection aHR: 0.95, P=.93].

My take (borrowed from authors): “Overlapping switches were common and not associated with an increased risk of serious infection versus non-overlapping biologics.” Thus, shortened washout periods appear to pose minimal safety risks to patients while improving UC/CD therapy management.

Related blog posts:

Bohicket Creek near Charleston, SC

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition..

ACCURE Trial: Appendectomy As an Adjunct Ulcerative Colitis Treatment Plus One

Posted on by

YIZ Acherman, et al. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 2025. DOI: 10.1016/S2468-1253(25)00026-3. Open access! Appendicectomy plus standard medical therapy versus standard medical therapy alone for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis (ACCURE): a pragmatic, open-label, international, randomised trial

Background: “An inverse association between appendicectomy and the development of ulcerative colitis was first reported in 1987, with subsequent case-control studies confirming this observation, and suggesting a possible role of the appendix in ulcerative colitis. In 2016, our research group did a systematic review and meta-analysis of available (case-control) studies. This analysis showed that previous appendicectomy was associated with a significantly reduced risk of developing ulcerative colitis, with an overall odds ratio of 0·39 (95% CI 0·29–0·52).”

Methods:  Adult patients (n=197) with established ulcerative colitis who were in remission but had been treated for disease relapse within the preceding 12 months were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo appendicectomy plus continued maintenance medical therapy (intervention group) or to continue maintenance medical therapy alone (control group). Approximately 25% of participants had pancolitis.

Key findings:

  • The 1-year relapse rate was significantly lower in the appendicectomy group than in the control group (36 [36%] of 99 patients vs 55 [56%] of 98 patients; relative risk 0·65 [p=0·005; adjusted p=0·002). 
Relapse Rate

My take (borrowed from the authors): “The ACCURE trial is the first randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical effectiveness of appendicectomy in maintaining remission in patients with ulcerative colitis without advanced medical therapy (ie, biologicals or small molecules). This trial shows that laparoscopic appendicectomy, in addition to standard medical therapy, significantly reduces the relapse rates within 1 year.”

Also, NPR notes 5/5/25: NIH cuts baby ‘Safe to Sleep’ team. Here’s what parents should know

Related blog posts:

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.