Comparison of the efficacy of granulocyte and monocyte/macrophage adsorptive apheresis and leukocytapheresis in active ulcerative colitis patients: a prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease associated with recurring inflammation of the colorectal mucosa. Recently, cytapheresis has emerged as a new treatment for patients with UC. Removal methods are mainly performed with beads [granulocyte and monocyte/macrophage adsorptive apheresis (GMCAP)] or filters [leukocytapheresis (LCAP)]. Both treatments have been reported to be effective for active UC. There have been few trials, however, comparing the efficacy of GMCAP and LCAP. In this study, we prospectively evaluated the efficacy of LCAP and GMCAP for the treatment of active UC. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients [18 male, 21 female; mean age 38.7 years; duration of disease 6 years; clinical activity index (CAI) >6 points] with moderate-to-severe active UC were randomly assigned to the LCAP (n=21) or GMCAP group (n=17). Adacolumn (cellulose acetate beads; Japan Immunoresearch Laboratories, Takasaki, Japan) for GMCAP and Cellsorba EX (polyethylene phthalate fibers; Asahi Medical Co. Ltd, Tokyo, Japan) for LCAP were used for leukocyte removal. Patients received two sessions of cytapheresis in the first week, followed by four weekly administrations. Steroid doses were tapered if patients achieved clinical improvement. When the CAI score had decreased by 5 points or more, the patient was considered to have improved. RESULTS: Thirteen patients in the GMCAP group and 14 in the LCAP group achieved clinical improvement. No significant difference was found in clinical response and clinical course between LCAP and GMCAP. Hemoglobin levels were significantly decreased immediately after one session of cytapheresis in the LCAP group. No severe adverse effects were observed in any of the patients. No significant differences were observed in any clinical parameters predictive of a response to either LCAP or GMCAP. But in all patients receiving cytapheresis, a high CAI score was a significant risk factor for treatment failure. All of the cytapheresis nonresponders had CAI scores >or=16. CONCLUSION: Both GMCAP and LCAP were effective treatments for active UC. Patients with severe UC and a high CAI score were, however, refractory to treatment.     

Outcome of directly observed therapy for tuberculosis in Yokohama City, Japan.

BACKGROUND: Yokohama City is currently developing directly observed treatment (DOT) in its programme, and requires guidance on types of DOT appropriate for local conditions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of DOT for tuberculosis treatment in a retrospective study under operational conditions in Yokohama City. METHODS: We included 80 patients with sputum-positive tuberculosis, 39 enrolled in DOT and 41 self-administered patients. The study was done at the National Hospital for Chest Diseases and the Community Clinic, which provide tuberculosis services with a standard daily short-course regimen. The main outcome measures were cure and treatment completion. RESULTS: The cure or treatment completion rate for the DOT and self-administered groups were respectively 87.2% and 68.3%. In a multivariate logistic regression model, cure or treatment completion was significantly associated with out-patient DOT (OR 4.04, 95%CI 1.22-13.33, P = 0.022). CONCLUSION: DOT was shown to be significantly superior to the self-administered regimen. However, our results were from an impoverished population with city-sponsored apartments and supplementary benefits. Further research will be needed to know the effectiveness of DOT in the general population.     

Prevention of recurrence of esophageal varices after endoscopic injection sclerotherapy with ethanolamine oleate

Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy was given to 155 patients with esophageal varices mainly related to non-alcoholic liver cirrhosis. The formation of a superficial ulcer in the lower esophagus was achieved in 141 (91.0%) of the 155 patients, with an average of 4.1 sessions of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy during an average time of 4.9 weeks. The average volume of 5% ethanolamine oleate sclerosant used was 24.8, 19.2, 12.3 and 6.5 ml for the initial to fourth sessions of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy, respectively. For 14 patients, a sufficient number of sessions of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy could not be given: 10 early deaths (5 hepatoma, 4 liver failure and 1 gastric bleeding), and 4 refused further sessions. When the esophageal mucosa had been eliminated and a superficial ulcer had formed, episodes of recurrent bleeding or recurrence of esophageal varices were nil over a median follow-up of 14.6 months, with a range of 1 to 27 months. In seven patients, bleeding recurred before elimination of the mucosa could be achieved, but these bleeding episodes were well controlled with an additional session of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy. At the time of analysis, there were 36 deaths (20 hepatoma, 14 liver failure and 2 gastric bleeding) among these 155 patients. Thus, the mean follow-up was 16.3 months (range: 7 to 27 months) in the 119 survivors, with no recurrence of the varices. We propose that removal of the esophageal mucosa may well be the endpoint of repeated endoscopic injection sclerotherapy in the management of patients on injection sclerotherapy.