From the Journals

Chronic psychological stress is common. A 2023 survey revealed that about one quarter of US adults reported high stress levels, and three quarters reported that chronic stress affects their daily lives.

Emerging evidence suggests that chronic stress not only exacts a high toll on mental health but also can wreak havoc on all levels of gastrointestinal (GI) functioning, all the way down to the microbiome.

“Chronic stress can change the diversity and composition of the gut microbiome and essentially tips us toward an imbalance or dysbiosis,” Aasma Shaukat, MD, MPH, AGAF, gastroenterologist with NYU Langone Health and director of GI Outcomes Research, Gastroenterology at NYU Grossman School of Medicine in New York City, said in an interview with GI & Hepatology News.

“This basically means that the normal balance of microorganisms that essentially we think are beneficial gets reduced, and the colonies considered to be more harmful proliferate,” she explained.

 

What Does the Science Tell Us?

Numerous studies published in the past 5 years have linked chronic stress to modest but reproducible shifts in the composition of the microbiome.

A study of frontline healthcare workers during COVID-19 revealed that the pandemic was associated with significant depression, anxiety, and stress, as well as gut dysbiosis that persisted for at least half a year.

Notably, healthcare workers had low gut alpha diversity, indicating a less resilient and diverse microbiome, a state often associated with dysbiosis and increased risk for various diseases and negative health outcomes.

A two-cohort study of healthy adults found higher alpha diversity in those reporting low stress levels. It also found a link between stress and enriched levels of Escherichia/Shigella, an overgrowth of which has been linked to various conditions, including inflammatory bowel disease.

In addition, a 2023 systematic review of human studies concluded that stress is associated with changes in specific genera — namely reductions in gut-healthy Lachnospira/Lachnospiraceae and Phascolarctobacterium, which produce beneficial short-chain fatty acids that support the health of the intestinal lining and modulate the immune system.

Stress during specific life stages also appears to alter the gut microbiome.

For example, in a study of postpartum women, those at an increased risk for parenting stress showed lower alpha diversity on the Shannon diversity index.

Research involving mother-child pairs tied adversity — such as maltreatment of the mother during her childhood, prenatal anxiety, and hardship in the child’s early life — to distinct microbiome profiles in 2-year-olds, supporting a stress-microbiome pathway relevant to socioemotional outcomes, the authors said.

Emerging evidence indicates a link between the gut microbiome and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

A recent systematic review found differences in gut microbial taxa between individuals with PTSD and trauma-exposed controls without PTSD. A separate analysis pointed to a potential causal impact of gut microbiomes on the development of PTSD.

 

Mechanisms Behind the Link

Stress interferes with the brain’s production of neurotransmitters, such as serotonin, which controls anxiety, mood, sleep, and many other functions in the brain, Shaukat told GI & Hepatology News.

“But serotonin also crosses the blood-brain barrier, and actually, the gut has more serotonin receptors than the brain, so an imbalance of serotonin can actually affect the gut microbiome through signaling at the neurotransmitter level,” Shaukat explained.

Stress can also affect sleep, and sleep itself has regulatory properties for gut bacteria, Shaukat noted.

“Stress also lowers our immunity, and this can make the gut barrier susceptible or permeable to bacterial toxins that can pass through and breach the gut barrier and be released into the bloodstream, which can trigger inflammation,” Shaukat explained.

 

Implications for Patient Care

The gut-brain-microbiome axis remains an emerging field of study. “We’re learning more and more about this, and we need to because the microbial colonies are so diverse and we haven’t nailed it down yet,” Shaukat said.

In the meantime, what can clinicians tell patients?

Aside from managing stress, which “is easier said than done,” patients can improve their diet, Shaukat said.

“What we tell patients is to essentially increase their intake of gut-friendly foods that preferentially grow the bacterial colonies that are beneficial for us,” Shaukat said. This includes fermented foods, yogurt, kimchi, chia seeds, kombucha, pickled vegetables, and whole grains.

A recent randomized controlled trial of healthy adults found a “psychobiotic diet” — a diet high in prebiotic and fermented foods — was associated with less perceived stress and subtle beneficial shifts in microbial composition.

“These foods can help keep the gut in good health and may actually also reduce or mitigate some of the effects of stress,” Shaukat said.

“Eating well is something I think we should all think about and maybe prioritize when we’re going through a stressful situation or looking to kind of mitigate the effects of stress and the anxiety and depression it can cause,” she advised.

Shaukat said she also encourages patients to engage in regular physical activity, which benefits the gut microbiome by helping to regulate gut motility. Exercise can also boost mood and help relieve stress.

“A balanced Mediterranean diet and regular activity is truly the secret for gut health,” Shaukat said.

Patients may be tempted by the probiotic supplements lining drugstore shelves, but there “isn’t great evidence for probiotic supplements,” she said. “What we can get from dietary sources far outweighs what can be put in a pill.”

Shaukat disclosed having no relevant disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Chronic psychological stress is common. A 2023 survey revealed that about one quarter of US adults reported high stress levels, and three quarters reported that chronic stress affects their daily lives.

Emerging evidence suggests that chronic stress not only exacts a high toll on mental health but also can wreak havoc on all levels of gastrointestinal (GI) functioning, all the way down to the microbiome.

“Chronic stress can change the diversity and composition of the gut microbiome and essentially tips us toward an imbalance or dysbiosis,” Aasma Shaukat, MD, MPH, AGAF, gastroenterologist with NYU Langone Health and director of GI Outcomes Research, Gastroenterology at NYU Grossman School of Medicine in New York City, said in an interview with GI & Hepatology News.

“This basically means that the normal balance of microorganisms that essentially we think are beneficial gets reduced, and the colonies considered to be more harmful proliferate,” she explained.

 

What Does the Science Tell Us?

Numerous studies published in the past 5 years have linked chronic stress to modest but reproducible shifts in the composition of the microbiome.

A study of frontline healthcare workers during COVID-19 revealed that the pandemic was associated with significant depression, anxiety, and stress, as well as gut dysbiosis that persisted for at least half a year.

Notably, healthcare workers had low gut alpha diversity, indicating a less resilient and diverse microbiome, a state often associated with dysbiosis and increased risk for various diseases and negative health outcomes.

A two-cohort study of healthy adults found higher alpha diversity in those reporting low stress levels. It also found a link between stress and enriched levels of Escherichia/Shigella, an overgrowth of which has been linked to various conditions, including inflammatory bowel disease.

In addition, a 2023 systematic review of human studies concluded that stress is associated with changes in specific genera — namely reductions in gut-healthy Lachnospira/Lachnospiraceae and Phascolarctobacterium, which produce beneficial short-chain fatty acids that support the health of the intestinal lining and modulate the immune system.

Stress during specific life stages also appears to alter the gut microbiome.

For example, in a study of postpartum women, those at an increased risk for parenting stress showed lower alpha diversity on the Shannon diversity index.

Research involving mother-child pairs tied adversity — such as maltreatment of the mother during her childhood, prenatal anxiety, and hardship in the child’s early life — to distinct microbiome profiles in 2-year-olds, supporting a stress-microbiome pathway relevant to socioemotional outcomes, the authors said.

Emerging evidence indicates a link between the gut microbiome and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

A recent systematic review found differences in gut microbial taxa between individuals with PTSD and trauma-exposed controls without PTSD. A separate analysis pointed to a potential causal impact of gut microbiomes on the development of PTSD.

 

Mechanisms Behind the Link

Stress interferes with the brain’s production of neurotransmitters, such as serotonin, which controls anxiety, mood, sleep, and many other functions in the brain, Shaukat told GI & Hepatology News.

“But serotonin also crosses the blood-brain barrier, and actually, the gut has more serotonin receptors than the brain, so an imbalance of serotonin can actually affect the gut microbiome through signaling at the neurotransmitter level,” Shaukat explained.

Stress can also affect sleep, and sleep itself has regulatory properties for gut bacteria, Shaukat noted.

“Stress also lowers our immunity, and this can make the gut barrier susceptible or permeable to bacterial toxins that can pass through and breach the gut barrier and be released into the bloodstream, which can trigger inflammation,” Shaukat explained.

 

Implications for Patient Care

The gut-brain-microbiome axis remains an emerging field of study. “We’re learning more and more about this, and we need to because the microbial colonies are so diverse and we haven’t nailed it down yet,” Shaukat said.

In the meantime, what can clinicians tell patients?

Aside from managing stress, which “is easier said than done,” patients can improve their diet, Shaukat said.

“What we tell patients is to essentially increase their intake of gut-friendly foods that preferentially grow the bacterial colonies that are beneficial for us,” Shaukat said. This includes fermented foods, yogurt, kimchi, chia seeds, kombucha, pickled vegetables, and whole grains.

A recent randomized controlled trial of healthy adults found a “psychobiotic diet” — a diet high in prebiotic and fermented foods — was associated with less perceived stress and subtle beneficial shifts in microbial composition.

“These foods can help keep the gut in good health and may actually also reduce or mitigate some of the effects of stress,” Shaukat said.

“Eating well is something I think we should all think about and maybe prioritize when we’re going through a stressful situation or looking to kind of mitigate the effects of stress and the anxiety and depression it can cause,” she advised.

Shaukat said she also encourages patients to engage in regular physical activity, which benefits the gut microbiome by helping to regulate gut motility. Exercise can also boost mood and help relieve stress.

“A balanced Mediterranean diet and regular activity is truly the secret for gut health,” Shaukat said.

Patients may be tempted by the probiotic supplements lining drugstore shelves, but there “isn’t great evidence for probiotic supplements,” she said. “What we can get from dietary sources far outweighs what can be put in a pill.”

Shaukat disclosed having no relevant disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Chronic psychological stress is common. A 2023 survey revealed that about one quarter of US adults reported high stress levels, and three quarters reported that chronic stress affects their daily lives.

Emerging evidence suggests that chronic stress not only exacts a high toll on mental health but also can wreak havoc on all levels of gastrointestinal (GI) functioning, all the way down to the microbiome.

“Chronic stress can change the diversity and composition of the gut microbiome and essentially tips us toward an imbalance or dysbiosis,” Aasma Shaukat, MD, MPH, AGAF, gastroenterologist with NYU Langone Health and director of GI Outcomes Research, Gastroenterology at NYU Grossman School of Medicine in New York City, said in an interview with GI & Hepatology News.

“This basically means that the normal balance of microorganisms that essentially we think are beneficial gets reduced, and the colonies considered to be more harmful proliferate,” she explained.

 

What Does the Science Tell Us?

Numerous studies published in the past 5 years have linked chronic stress to modest but reproducible shifts in the composition of the microbiome.

A study of frontline healthcare workers during COVID-19 revealed that the pandemic was associated with significant depression, anxiety, and stress, as well as gut dysbiosis that persisted for at least half a year.

Notably, healthcare workers had low gut alpha diversity, indicating a less resilient and diverse microbiome, a state often associated with dysbiosis and increased risk for various diseases and negative health outcomes.

A two-cohort study of healthy adults found higher alpha diversity in those reporting low stress levels. It also found a link between stress and enriched levels of Escherichia/Shigella, an overgrowth of which has been linked to various conditions, including inflammatory bowel disease.

In addition, a 2023 systematic review of human studies concluded that stress is associated with changes in specific genera — namely reductions in gut-healthy Lachnospira/Lachnospiraceae and Phascolarctobacterium, which produce beneficial short-chain fatty acids that support the health of the intestinal lining and modulate the immune system.

Stress during specific life stages also appears to alter the gut microbiome.

For example, in a study of postpartum women, those at an increased risk for parenting stress showed lower alpha diversity on the Shannon diversity index.

Research involving mother-child pairs tied adversity — such as maltreatment of the mother during her childhood, prenatal anxiety, and hardship in the child’s early life — to distinct microbiome profiles in 2-year-olds, supporting a stress-microbiome pathway relevant to socioemotional outcomes, the authors said.

Emerging evidence indicates a link between the gut microbiome and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

A recent systematic review found differences in gut microbial taxa between individuals with PTSD and trauma-exposed controls without PTSD. A separate analysis pointed to a potential causal impact of gut microbiomes on the development of PTSD.

 

Mechanisms Behind the Link

Stress interferes with the brain’s production of neurotransmitters, such as serotonin, which controls anxiety, mood, sleep, and many other functions in the brain, Shaukat told GI & Hepatology News.

“But serotonin also crosses the blood-brain barrier, and actually, the gut has more serotonin receptors than the brain, so an imbalance of serotonin can actually affect the gut microbiome through signaling at the neurotransmitter level,” Shaukat explained.

Stress can also affect sleep, and sleep itself has regulatory properties for gut bacteria, Shaukat noted.

“Stress also lowers our immunity, and this can make the gut barrier susceptible or permeable to bacterial toxins that can pass through and breach the gut barrier and be released into the bloodstream, which can trigger inflammation,” Shaukat explained.

 

Implications for Patient Care

The gut-brain-microbiome axis remains an emerging field of study. “We’re learning more and more about this, and we need to because the microbial colonies are so diverse and we haven’t nailed it down yet,” Shaukat said.

In the meantime, what can clinicians tell patients?

Aside from managing stress, which “is easier said than done,” patients can improve their diet, Shaukat said.

“What we tell patients is to essentially increase their intake of gut-friendly foods that preferentially grow the bacterial colonies that are beneficial for us,” Shaukat said. This includes fermented foods, yogurt, kimchi, chia seeds, kombucha, pickled vegetables, and whole grains.

A recent randomized controlled trial of healthy adults found a “psychobiotic diet” — a diet high in prebiotic and fermented foods — was associated with less perceived stress and subtle beneficial shifts in microbial composition.

“These foods can help keep the gut in good health and may actually also reduce or mitigate some of the effects of stress,” Shaukat said.

“Eating well is something I think we should all think about and maybe prioritize when we’re going through a stressful situation or looking to kind of mitigate the effects of stress and the anxiety and depression it can cause,” she advised.

Shaukat said she also encourages patients to engage in regular physical activity, which benefits the gut microbiome by helping to regulate gut motility. Exercise can also boost mood and help relieve stress.

“A balanced Mediterranean diet and regular activity is truly the secret for gut health,” Shaukat said.

Patients may be tempted by the probiotic supplements lining drugstore shelves, but there “isn’t great evidence for probiotic supplements,” she said. “What we can get from dietary sources far outweighs what can be put in a pill.”

Shaukat disclosed having no relevant disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

An intensive 1-day overview course in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) continues to attract large numbers of first-year gastrointestinal(GI) fellows across the country.

Results from the initial pilot program in 2019, called “IBD 101: Physicians and Patients Providing Pearls and Perspectives” are outlined in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases by Lisa Malter, MD, AGAF, a professor of medicine in the Division of Gastroenterology at NYU Langone Grossman School of Medicine, New York City, and colleagues.

The course, conducted by Malter at NYU Langone’s simulation center, was designed to increase fellows’ early exposure to the complexities of IBD and its diagnosis and management in the context of rapidly changing therapies and variability across US GI training programs. The authors reported that the 2019 program was well received, with attendees showing “increased comfort and sustained benefit” in discussing IBD management with patients. Notably, participants’ increased comfort levels in broaching IBD topics persisted 3 years after the course compared with that of nonparticipating peers, pointing to potential improved patient care after completion of training.

“At this point, 1 in every 100 GI patients has IBD. It’s one of the more complex GI conditions and its incidence and prevalence are increasing globally,” Malter told GI & Hepatology News. Prevalence rates in the US are reportedly as high as 464.5 per 100,000 persons.

“In addition, its management has become more complicated with newer medications and treatments coming on stream,” she said. “An educational gap exists.”

 

The Program

The course provided an intimate, interactive format with national experts in the field serving as faculty. Course objectives included basic, introductory information on the diagnosis, treatment, and management of IBD; early exposure to IBD as a subspecialty to allow registrants to make informed career decisions; and information about other educational opportunities.

The course was designed to raise participants’ comfort levels in discussing seven topics with patients, including the need for surgery, IBD in pregnancy, treatment escalation in different disease scenarios, and lack of treatment response.

The three-part course, featuring case scenarios, was offered in person to 60 fellows selected by regional GI fellowship program directors and course faculty, which consisted of a director, three codirectors, and 14 local and national IBD experts. A half-day training session for faculty was held immediately before the course.

In September 2019, the first 32 fellows from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs participated in IBD 101. A total of 49 (89%) of 55 participants completed presession and immediate postsession surveys.

In the 3-year follow-up survey, among 36 fellows, of whom 21 (58%) attended IBD 101 and 15 (42%) did not, attendees reported overall IBD confidence and equivalent or higher levels of comfort in discussing each of seven topics.

Among the specific survey findings: 

• 100% said the course had improved their ability to effectively treat and manage patients
• A higher proportion of attendees strongly agreed with having comfort in discussing pregnancy in IBD (43% vs 13%; P = .08) 
• A statistically significant proportion strongly agreed with having comfort in discussing loss of response to biologics (62% vs 27%; P = .049)
• 98% reported increased interest in exploring IBD during fellowship
• 100% noted improved understanding of supplemental opportunities to learn about IBD
• 96% would strongly recommend this course to future GI fellows

Further testimony to the effectiveness of the ongoing course, said Malter, is that the version offered in 2024 attracted 425 GI fellows from across the country. “That’s about 90% of US GI fellows,” she said.

Offering an outsider’s perspective on the results of the course, Ashwin N. Ananthakrishnan, MBBS, MPH, AGAF, a director or the Crohn’s and Colitis Center at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, said, “It’s a useful update. It’s always good to see benefits from educational courses.” He expressed caution, however, “in that a small subset of GI fellows always selects toward those with greater IBD interest. Consequently, they likely have participated in several other IBD education activities in the intervening 3 years — so one can’t attribute benefit to this course alone.”

And while one effect of such courses may to increase the number of IBD-interested trainees, their role in providing IBD education to gastroenterologists who will not specialize in IBD is more important, Ananthakrishnan added. “These general gastroenterologists are going to be managing a lot of the IBD in the community, so in my opinion, ensuring they are comfortable with caring for IBD patients optimally is more important than training IBD specialists, who have many opportunities for education.”

In collaboration with the American College of Gastroenterology, the course is open to all first-year GI fellows training in North America. The most recent program was held on September 13, 2025.

This paper received no specific funding. The IBD course has been supported by unrestricted educational grants from Pfizer and Takeda Pharmaceuticals and sponsorships from AbbVie, Janssen, and Prometheus Labs.Malter reported receiving educational grants from AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda; serving as a consultant for Abbvie and Pharmacosmos; and serving on the advisory boards for AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Janssen, Merck, and Takeda. Multiple coauthors disclosed similar relationships with numerous private-sector companies.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

An intensive 1-day overview course in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) continues to attract large numbers of first-year gastrointestinal(GI) fellows across the country.

Results from the initial pilot program in 2019, called “IBD 101: Physicians and Patients Providing Pearls and Perspectives” are outlined in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases by Lisa Malter, MD, AGAF, a professor of medicine in the Division of Gastroenterology at NYU Langone Grossman School of Medicine, New York City, and colleagues.

The course, conducted by Malter at NYU Langone’s simulation center, was designed to increase fellows’ early exposure to the complexities of IBD and its diagnosis and management in the context of rapidly changing therapies and variability across US GI training programs. The authors reported that the 2019 program was well received, with attendees showing “increased comfort and sustained benefit” in discussing IBD management with patients. Notably, participants’ increased comfort levels in broaching IBD topics persisted 3 years after the course compared with that of nonparticipating peers, pointing to potential improved patient care after completion of training.

“At this point, 1 in every 100 GI patients has IBD. It’s one of the more complex GI conditions and its incidence and prevalence are increasing globally,” Malter told GI & Hepatology News. Prevalence rates in the US are reportedly as high as 464.5 per 100,000 persons.

“In addition, its management has become more complicated with newer medications and treatments coming on stream,” she said. “An educational gap exists.”

 

The Program

The course provided an intimate, interactive format with national experts in the field serving as faculty. Course objectives included basic, introductory information on the diagnosis, treatment, and management of IBD; early exposure to IBD as a subspecialty to allow registrants to make informed career decisions; and information about other educational opportunities.

The course was designed to raise participants’ comfort levels in discussing seven topics with patients, including the need for surgery, IBD in pregnancy, treatment escalation in different disease scenarios, and lack of treatment response.

The three-part course, featuring case scenarios, was offered in person to 60 fellows selected by regional GI fellowship program directors and course faculty, which consisted of a director, three codirectors, and 14 local and national IBD experts. A half-day training session for faculty was held immediately before the course.

In September 2019, the first 32 fellows from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs participated in IBD 101. A total of 49 (89%) of 55 participants completed presession and immediate postsession surveys.

In the 3-year follow-up survey, among 36 fellows, of whom 21 (58%) attended IBD 101 and 15 (42%) did not, attendees reported overall IBD confidence and equivalent or higher levels of comfort in discussing each of seven topics.

Among the specific survey findings: 

• 100% said the course had improved their ability to effectively treat and manage patients
• A higher proportion of attendees strongly agreed with having comfort in discussing pregnancy in IBD (43% vs 13%; P = .08) 
• A statistically significant proportion strongly agreed with having comfort in discussing loss of response to biologics (62% vs 27%; P = .049)
• 98% reported increased interest in exploring IBD during fellowship
• 100% noted improved understanding of supplemental opportunities to learn about IBD
• 96% would strongly recommend this course to future GI fellows

Further testimony to the effectiveness of the ongoing course, said Malter, is that the version offered in 2024 attracted 425 GI fellows from across the country. “That’s about 90% of US GI fellows,” she said.

Offering an outsider’s perspective on the results of the course, Ashwin N. Ananthakrishnan, MBBS, MPH, AGAF, a director or the Crohn’s and Colitis Center at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, said, “It’s a useful update. It’s always good to see benefits from educational courses.” He expressed caution, however, “in that a small subset of GI fellows always selects toward those with greater IBD interest. Consequently, they likely have participated in several other IBD education activities in the intervening 3 years — so one can’t attribute benefit to this course alone.”

And while one effect of such courses may to increase the number of IBD-interested trainees, their role in providing IBD education to gastroenterologists who will not specialize in IBD is more important, Ananthakrishnan added. “These general gastroenterologists are going to be managing a lot of the IBD in the community, so in my opinion, ensuring they are comfortable with caring for IBD patients optimally is more important than training IBD specialists, who have many opportunities for education.”

In collaboration with the American College of Gastroenterology, the course is open to all first-year GI fellows training in North America. The most recent program was held on September 13, 2025.

This paper received no specific funding. The IBD course has been supported by unrestricted educational grants from Pfizer and Takeda Pharmaceuticals and sponsorships from AbbVie, Janssen, and Prometheus Labs.Malter reported receiving educational grants from AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda; serving as a consultant for Abbvie and Pharmacosmos; and serving on the advisory boards for AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Janssen, Merck, and Takeda. Multiple coauthors disclosed similar relationships with numerous private-sector companies.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

An intensive 1-day overview course in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) continues to attract large numbers of first-year gastrointestinal(GI) fellows across the country.

Results from the initial pilot program in 2019, called “IBD 101: Physicians and Patients Providing Pearls and Perspectives” are outlined in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases by Lisa Malter, MD, AGAF, a professor of medicine in the Division of Gastroenterology at NYU Langone Grossman School of Medicine, New York City, and colleagues.

The course, conducted by Malter at NYU Langone’s simulation center, was designed to increase fellows’ early exposure to the complexities of IBD and its diagnosis and management in the context of rapidly changing therapies and variability across US GI training programs. The authors reported that the 2019 program was well received, with attendees showing “increased comfort and sustained benefit” in discussing IBD management with patients. Notably, participants’ increased comfort levels in broaching IBD topics persisted 3 years after the course compared with that of nonparticipating peers, pointing to potential improved patient care after completion of training.

“At this point, 1 in every 100 GI patients has IBD. It’s one of the more complex GI conditions and its incidence and prevalence are increasing globally,” Malter told GI & Hepatology News. Prevalence rates in the US are reportedly as high as 464.5 per 100,000 persons.

“In addition, its management has become more complicated with newer medications and treatments coming on stream,” she said. “An educational gap exists.”

 

The Program

The course provided an intimate, interactive format with national experts in the field serving as faculty. Course objectives included basic, introductory information on the diagnosis, treatment, and management of IBD; early exposure to IBD as a subspecialty to allow registrants to make informed career decisions; and information about other educational opportunities.

The course was designed to raise participants’ comfort levels in discussing seven topics with patients, including the need for surgery, IBD in pregnancy, treatment escalation in different disease scenarios, and lack of treatment response.

The three-part course, featuring case scenarios, was offered in person to 60 fellows selected by regional GI fellowship program directors and course faculty, which consisted of a director, three codirectors, and 14 local and national IBD experts. A half-day training session for faculty was held immediately before the course.

In September 2019, the first 32 fellows from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs participated in IBD 101. A total of 49 (89%) of 55 participants completed presession and immediate postsession surveys.

In the 3-year follow-up survey, among 36 fellows, of whom 21 (58%) attended IBD 101 and 15 (42%) did not, attendees reported overall IBD confidence and equivalent or higher levels of comfort in discussing each of seven topics.

Among the specific survey findings: 

• 100% said the course had improved their ability to effectively treat and manage patients
• A higher proportion of attendees strongly agreed with having comfort in discussing pregnancy in IBD (43% vs 13%; P = .08) 
• A statistically significant proportion strongly agreed with having comfort in discussing loss of response to biologics (62% vs 27%; P = .049)
• 98% reported increased interest in exploring IBD during fellowship
• 100% noted improved understanding of supplemental opportunities to learn about IBD
• 96% would strongly recommend this course to future GI fellows

Further testimony to the effectiveness of the ongoing course, said Malter, is that the version offered in 2024 attracted 425 GI fellows from across the country. “That’s about 90% of US GI fellows,” she said.

Offering an outsider’s perspective on the results of the course, Ashwin N. Ananthakrishnan, MBBS, MPH, AGAF, a director or the Crohn’s and Colitis Center at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, said, “It’s a useful update. It’s always good to see benefits from educational courses.” He expressed caution, however, “in that a small subset of GI fellows always selects toward those with greater IBD interest. Consequently, they likely have participated in several other IBD education activities in the intervening 3 years — so one can’t attribute benefit to this course alone.”

And while one effect of such courses may to increase the number of IBD-interested trainees, their role in providing IBD education to gastroenterologists who will not specialize in IBD is more important, Ananthakrishnan added. “These general gastroenterologists are going to be managing a lot of the IBD in the community, so in my opinion, ensuring they are comfortable with caring for IBD patients optimally is more important than training IBD specialists, who have many opportunities for education.”

In collaboration with the American College of Gastroenterology, the course is open to all first-year GI fellows training in North America. The most recent program was held on September 13, 2025.

This paper received no specific funding. The IBD course has been supported by unrestricted educational grants from Pfizer and Takeda Pharmaceuticals and sponsorships from AbbVie, Janssen, and Prometheus Labs.Malter reported receiving educational grants from AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda; serving as a consultant for Abbvie and Pharmacosmos; and serving on the advisory boards for AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Janssen, Merck, and Takeda. Multiple coauthors disclosed similar relationships with numerous private-sector companies.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

An eight-strain probiotic has been shown to reduce the risk for pouchitis in patients with ulcerative colitis who undergo ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA), but its cost-effectiveness depends on relapse risk and may only be justified in patients who experience frequent relapses of pouchitis, a new analysis showed.

“Our findings highlight that while probiotic treatments can reduce the risk of this complication, their high costs limit their overall value for most patients,” lead author Gaurav Syal, MD, a gastroenterologist at UCLA Health, said in a statement.

“Our analysis can help guide shared decision-making between patients, clinicians, and payers to ensure resources are used where they can provide the most benefit,” Syal added.

The study was published online in Gastro Hep Advances.

 

Common Complication After Ulcerative Colitis Surgery

Pouchitis is a common complication in patients with ulcerative colitis who undergo restorative proctocolectomy with IPAA, with a cumulative incidence of around 48% at 2 years and 80% at 30 years.

Many patients who experience pouchitis have a single episode and respond well to short antibiotic courses. However, others develop recurrent or relapsing pouchitis, and 17% progress to a chronic form that can become dependent on antibiotics or refractory to antibiotics.

An eight-strain probiotic was shown to be effective in primary and secondary prevention of pouchitis in randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

Syal and colleagues sought to determine whether it’s worth the cost.

They constructed decision-tree models with Markov simulations to compare the risk for initial development and recurrence of pouchitis over a 2-year period between no prophylaxis and daily use of the eight-strain probiotic.

In the primary prophylaxis model, the cycle length was 2 weeks and pouchitis treatment sequence was ciprofloxacin, metronidazole and ciprofloxacin-tinidazole. In the secondary prophylaxis model, the cycle length was 4 weeks and pouchitis treatment sequence was initially the same as the primary prophylaxis model with the addition of vedolizumab and infliximab.

Costs were calculated from a US third-party payer perspective, using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

For primary prevention, the probiotic slightly increased QALYs compared with no probiotic (0.927 vs 0.918) but at a far higher cost ($2223 vs $299), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $236,076 per QALY — well above the accepted threshold.

In patients with infrequent relapses, probiotic use was slightly more effective than no use of probiotic (cumulative QALYs, 1.26 vs 1.24) but more expensive ($3370 vs $557), yielding an ICER of $153,011 per QALY — again above the accepted threshold.

However, sensitivity analyses revealed that the probiotic was cost-effective in patients with frequent relapsing pouchitis — defined as two or more episodes per year.

In this subgroup, the ICER dropped below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY, and in some scenarios, the probiotic even became the dominant strategy, meaning it was both more effective and less costly than no prophylaxis, the researchers noted.

Current guidelines from AGA on managing pouchitis suggest using probiotics to prevent recurrent episodes of pouchitis with a caveat that those who experience infrequent episodes may choose to avoid secondary prevention strategies.

“Our findings supplement the guidelines by confirming that the eight-strain probiotics can be cost-effective in frequent relapsing not in infrequent relapsing pouchitis,” the authors wrote.

They also noted that the probiotic cost itself was the biggest driver of results, accounting for 95% of the total cost in the primary prevention model. According to their analysis, reducing its price by half could make it a cost-effective option more broadly.

They also noted that probiotic prophylaxis could be cost-effective for patients at higher-than-average risk, such as those with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), who have 4.2 times higher odds of developing pouchitis than peers without PSC.

But they cautioned that “further research is warranted on the effectiveness of the eight-strain probiotic for primary prevention of pouchitis in patients with ulcerative colitis and IPAA and PSC.”

The study had no financial support. Syal reported receiving research support from Pfizer.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

An eight-strain probiotic has been shown to reduce the risk for pouchitis in patients with ulcerative colitis who undergo ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA), but its cost-effectiveness depends on relapse risk and may only be justified in patients who experience frequent relapses of pouchitis, a new analysis showed.

“Our findings highlight that while probiotic treatments can reduce the risk of this complication, their high costs limit their overall value for most patients,” lead author Gaurav Syal, MD, a gastroenterologist at UCLA Health, said in a statement.

“Our analysis can help guide shared decision-making between patients, clinicians, and payers to ensure resources are used where they can provide the most benefit,” Syal added.

The study was published online in Gastro Hep Advances.

 

Common Complication After Ulcerative Colitis Surgery

Pouchitis is a common complication in patients with ulcerative colitis who undergo restorative proctocolectomy with IPAA, with a cumulative incidence of around 48% at 2 years and 80% at 30 years.

Many patients who experience pouchitis have a single episode and respond well to short antibiotic courses. However, others develop recurrent or relapsing pouchitis, and 17% progress to a chronic form that can become dependent on antibiotics or refractory to antibiotics.

An eight-strain probiotic was shown to be effective in primary and secondary prevention of pouchitis in randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

Syal and colleagues sought to determine whether it’s worth the cost.

They constructed decision-tree models with Markov simulations to compare the risk for initial development and recurrence of pouchitis over a 2-year period between no prophylaxis and daily use of the eight-strain probiotic.

In the primary prophylaxis model, the cycle length was 2 weeks and pouchitis treatment sequence was ciprofloxacin, metronidazole and ciprofloxacin-tinidazole. In the secondary prophylaxis model, the cycle length was 4 weeks and pouchitis treatment sequence was initially the same as the primary prophylaxis model with the addition of vedolizumab and infliximab.

Costs were calculated from a US third-party payer perspective, using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

For primary prevention, the probiotic slightly increased QALYs compared with no probiotic (0.927 vs 0.918) but at a far higher cost ($2223 vs $299), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $236,076 per QALY — well above the accepted threshold.

In patients with infrequent relapses, probiotic use was slightly more effective than no use of probiotic (cumulative QALYs, 1.26 vs 1.24) but more expensive ($3370 vs $557), yielding an ICER of $153,011 per QALY — again above the accepted threshold.

However, sensitivity analyses revealed that the probiotic was cost-effective in patients with frequent relapsing pouchitis — defined as two or more episodes per year.

In this subgroup, the ICER dropped below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY, and in some scenarios, the probiotic even became the dominant strategy, meaning it was both more effective and less costly than no prophylaxis, the researchers noted.

Current guidelines from AGA on managing pouchitis suggest using probiotics to prevent recurrent episodes of pouchitis with a caveat that those who experience infrequent episodes may choose to avoid secondary prevention strategies.

“Our findings supplement the guidelines by confirming that the eight-strain probiotics can be cost-effective in frequent relapsing not in infrequent relapsing pouchitis,” the authors wrote.

They also noted that the probiotic cost itself was the biggest driver of results, accounting for 95% of the total cost in the primary prevention model. According to their analysis, reducing its price by half could make it a cost-effective option more broadly.

They also noted that probiotic prophylaxis could be cost-effective for patients at higher-than-average risk, such as those with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), who have 4.2 times higher odds of developing pouchitis than peers without PSC.

But they cautioned that “further research is warranted on the effectiveness of the eight-strain probiotic for primary prevention of pouchitis in patients with ulcerative colitis and IPAA and PSC.”

The study had no financial support. Syal reported receiving research support from Pfizer.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

An eight-strain probiotic has been shown to reduce the risk for pouchitis in patients with ulcerative colitis who undergo ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA), but its cost-effectiveness depends on relapse risk and may only be justified in patients who experience frequent relapses of pouchitis, a new analysis showed.

“Our findings highlight that while probiotic treatments can reduce the risk of this complication, their high costs limit their overall value for most patients,” lead author Gaurav Syal, MD, a gastroenterologist at UCLA Health, said in a statement.

“Our analysis can help guide shared decision-making between patients, clinicians, and payers to ensure resources are used where they can provide the most benefit,” Syal added.

The study was published online in Gastro Hep Advances.

 

Common Complication After Ulcerative Colitis Surgery

Pouchitis is a common complication in patients with ulcerative colitis who undergo restorative proctocolectomy with IPAA, with a cumulative incidence of around 48% at 2 years and 80% at 30 years.

Many patients who experience pouchitis have a single episode and respond well to short antibiotic courses. However, others develop recurrent or relapsing pouchitis, and 17% progress to a chronic form that can become dependent on antibiotics or refractory to antibiotics.

An eight-strain probiotic was shown to be effective in primary and secondary prevention of pouchitis in randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

Syal and colleagues sought to determine whether it’s worth the cost.

They constructed decision-tree models with Markov simulations to compare the risk for initial development and recurrence of pouchitis over a 2-year period between no prophylaxis and daily use of the eight-strain probiotic.

In the primary prophylaxis model, the cycle length was 2 weeks and pouchitis treatment sequence was ciprofloxacin, metronidazole and ciprofloxacin-tinidazole. In the secondary prophylaxis model, the cycle length was 4 weeks and pouchitis treatment sequence was initially the same as the primary prophylaxis model with the addition of vedolizumab and infliximab.

Costs were calculated from a US third-party payer perspective, using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

For primary prevention, the probiotic slightly increased QALYs compared with no probiotic (0.927 vs 0.918) but at a far higher cost ($2223 vs $299), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $236,076 per QALY — well above the accepted threshold.

In patients with infrequent relapses, probiotic use was slightly more effective than no use of probiotic (cumulative QALYs, 1.26 vs 1.24) but more expensive ($3370 vs $557), yielding an ICER of $153,011 per QALY — again above the accepted threshold.

However, sensitivity analyses revealed that the probiotic was cost-effective in patients with frequent relapsing pouchitis — defined as two or more episodes per year.

In this subgroup, the ICER dropped below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY, and in some scenarios, the probiotic even became the dominant strategy, meaning it was both more effective and less costly than no prophylaxis, the researchers noted.

Current guidelines from AGA on managing pouchitis suggest using probiotics to prevent recurrent episodes of pouchitis with a caveat that those who experience infrequent episodes may choose to avoid secondary prevention strategies.

“Our findings supplement the guidelines by confirming that the eight-strain probiotics can be cost-effective in frequent relapsing not in infrequent relapsing pouchitis,” the authors wrote.

They also noted that the probiotic cost itself was the biggest driver of results, accounting for 95% of the total cost in the primary prevention model. According to their analysis, reducing its price by half could make it a cost-effective option more broadly.

They also noted that probiotic prophylaxis could be cost-effective for patients at higher-than-average risk, such as those with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), who have 4.2 times higher odds of developing pouchitis than peers without PSC.

But they cautioned that “further research is warranted on the effectiveness of the eight-strain probiotic for primary prevention of pouchitis in patients with ulcerative colitis and IPAA and PSC.”

The study had no financial support. Syal reported receiving research support from Pfizer.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Following a healthy diet and engaging in a high level of physical activity can significantly lower the risk for alcohol-related liver mortality, even among all drinking patterns, including heavy and binge drinking, according to a new study from Indiana University researchers.

Notably, any amount of daily alcohol intake or binge drinking increases the liver mortality risk, the researchers found. However, that risk can be reduced somewhat with healthy dietary patterns and increased physical activity.

Although previous studies suggested that one or two drinks per day could be associated with lower risks for cardiovascular disease, cancer, or liver-related outcomes, other confounders and unmeasured lifestyle behaviors could vary significantly between consumers and influence their health risks, the researchers said.

“A significant knowledge gap exists regarding the interplay of dietary patterns and physical activity with alcohol-attributable liver-specific mortality,” said senior author Naga Chalasani, MD, AGAF, professor of gastroenterology and hepatology at the Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis.

“It is not well understood whether healthy diets or increased physical activity levels explain differences in liver-specific mortality risks between lifetime abstainers and light-to-moderate alcohol consumers,” he said. “More importantly, it remains unclear whether a healthy diet and physical activity can lower liver-specific mortality in individuals engaging in high-risk alcohol consumption, such as heavy or binge drinking.”  

The study was published online in the Journal of Hepatology.

 

Analyzing Alcohol-Related Effects

Chalasani and colleagues analyzed data from more than 60,000 adults in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys for 1984-2018 and linked data in the National Death Index through December 2019.

The research team looked at self-reported alcohol use, diet quality based on the Healthy Eating Index, and physical activity levels. Heavy drinking was defined as more than three drinks per day for women and more than four drinks per day for men, while binge drinking was defined as four or more drinks per day for women and five or more drinks per day for men.

Physically active participants had at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity or 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity physical activity per week. Participants with healthier diets were in the top quartile of the Healthy Eating Index, which included diets high in vegetables, fruits, whole grains, seafood, plant-based proteins, and unsaturated fats, as well as diets low in solid fats, alcohol, and added sugars.

During a 12-year follow-up period, 12,881 deaths were reported, including 252 related to liver disease. An increased risk for liver-related death was associated with older age, smoking, diabetes, higher BMI, waist circumference, average daily alcohol intake, and binge drinking.

Compared to nondrinkers, those with daily alcohol intake had an increased liver-specific mortality risk, with an adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio (aSHR) of 1.04 for men and 1.08 for women.

Binge drinking had an even greater liver mortality risk, with an aSHR of 1.52 for men and 2.52 for women, than nonbinge drinking.

In contrast, a healthier diet — among those at the top quartile of the Healthy Eating Index — had a lower liver mortality risk in nonheavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.35), heavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.14), and binge drinkers (aSHR, 0.16).

In addition, physically active participants had a lower liver mortality risk for nonheavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.52), heavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.64), and binge drinkers (aSHR, 0.31).

Overall, the benefits of higher diet quality and physical activity were substantially greater in women than in men, the researchers found.

“The uniqueness of our study lies in its ability to simultaneously assess the moderating effects of two important lifestyle behaviors on liver mortality risk across different levels and patterns of alcohol consumption in a representative US population, offering a more nuanced and complete view of the risks of drinking,” Chalasani said.

 

Messaging From Clinicians to Patients

Despite some attenuation from a healthy diet and physical activity, alcohol consumption still carries an increased liver mortality risk, the researchers noted. Economically disadvantaged groups face higher exposure to high-risk alcohol use, unhealthy diets, and physical activity — and as a result, increased liver mortality.

“This study challenges the long-held belief that light-to-moderate drinking might be safe for the liver. It shows that any level of alcohol raises risk, but healthy diet and exercise can meaningfully reduce that harm,” said Joseph Ahn, MD, AGAF, assistant professor of medicine in the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. 

“The results should change how we think about alcohol — not as something potentially protective, but as a risk factor that can be partly mitigated by lifestyle,” he said.

“The key takeaway is that there is no safe level of alcohol for liver health. Clinicians should move away from reassuring patients about ‘moderate’ drinking and instead stress both alcohol reduction and the protective role of diet and physical activity,” Ahn added. “The next step is bringing these insights into guidelines and patient counseling, especially for populations at higher risk.”

The study was funded by departmental internal funding. Chalasani declared having no conflicts of interest for this paper, but he disclosed paid consulting agreements with numerous pharmaceutical companies. Ahn reported having no disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Following a healthy diet and engaging in a high level of physical activity can significantly lower the risk for alcohol-related liver mortality, even among all drinking patterns, including heavy and binge drinking, according to a new study from Indiana University researchers.

Notably, any amount of daily alcohol intake or binge drinking increases the liver mortality risk, the researchers found. However, that risk can be reduced somewhat with healthy dietary patterns and increased physical activity.

Although previous studies suggested that one or two drinks per day could be associated with lower risks for cardiovascular disease, cancer, or liver-related outcomes, other confounders and unmeasured lifestyle behaviors could vary significantly between consumers and influence their health risks, the researchers said.

“A significant knowledge gap exists regarding the interplay of dietary patterns and physical activity with alcohol-attributable liver-specific mortality,” said senior author Naga Chalasani, MD, AGAF, professor of gastroenterology and hepatology at the Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis.

“It is not well understood whether healthy diets or increased physical activity levels explain differences in liver-specific mortality risks between lifetime abstainers and light-to-moderate alcohol consumers,” he said. “More importantly, it remains unclear whether a healthy diet and physical activity can lower liver-specific mortality in individuals engaging in high-risk alcohol consumption, such as heavy or binge drinking.”  

The study was published online in the Journal of Hepatology.

 

Analyzing Alcohol-Related Effects

Chalasani and colleagues analyzed data from more than 60,000 adults in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys for 1984-2018 and linked data in the National Death Index through December 2019.

The research team looked at self-reported alcohol use, diet quality based on the Healthy Eating Index, and physical activity levels. Heavy drinking was defined as more than three drinks per day for women and more than four drinks per day for men, while binge drinking was defined as four or more drinks per day for women and five or more drinks per day for men.

Physically active participants had at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity or 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity physical activity per week. Participants with healthier diets were in the top quartile of the Healthy Eating Index, which included diets high in vegetables, fruits, whole grains, seafood, plant-based proteins, and unsaturated fats, as well as diets low in solid fats, alcohol, and added sugars.

During a 12-year follow-up period, 12,881 deaths were reported, including 252 related to liver disease. An increased risk for liver-related death was associated with older age, smoking, diabetes, higher BMI, waist circumference, average daily alcohol intake, and binge drinking.

Compared to nondrinkers, those with daily alcohol intake had an increased liver-specific mortality risk, with an adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio (aSHR) of 1.04 for men and 1.08 for women.

Binge drinking had an even greater liver mortality risk, with an aSHR of 1.52 for men and 2.52 for women, than nonbinge drinking.

In contrast, a healthier diet — among those at the top quartile of the Healthy Eating Index — had a lower liver mortality risk in nonheavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.35), heavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.14), and binge drinkers (aSHR, 0.16).

In addition, physically active participants had a lower liver mortality risk for nonheavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.52), heavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.64), and binge drinkers (aSHR, 0.31).

Overall, the benefits of higher diet quality and physical activity were substantially greater in women than in men, the researchers found.

“The uniqueness of our study lies in its ability to simultaneously assess the moderating effects of two important lifestyle behaviors on liver mortality risk across different levels and patterns of alcohol consumption in a representative US population, offering a more nuanced and complete view of the risks of drinking,” Chalasani said.

 

Messaging From Clinicians to Patients

Despite some attenuation from a healthy diet and physical activity, alcohol consumption still carries an increased liver mortality risk, the researchers noted. Economically disadvantaged groups face higher exposure to high-risk alcohol use, unhealthy diets, and physical activity — and as a result, increased liver mortality.

“This study challenges the long-held belief that light-to-moderate drinking might be safe for the liver. It shows that any level of alcohol raises risk, but healthy diet and exercise can meaningfully reduce that harm,” said Joseph Ahn, MD, AGAF, assistant professor of medicine in the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. 

“The results should change how we think about alcohol — not as something potentially protective, but as a risk factor that can be partly mitigated by lifestyle,” he said.

“The key takeaway is that there is no safe level of alcohol for liver health. Clinicians should move away from reassuring patients about ‘moderate’ drinking and instead stress both alcohol reduction and the protective role of diet and physical activity,” Ahn added. “The next step is bringing these insights into guidelines and patient counseling, especially for populations at higher risk.”

The study was funded by departmental internal funding. Chalasani declared having no conflicts of interest for this paper, but he disclosed paid consulting agreements with numerous pharmaceutical companies. Ahn reported having no disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Following a healthy diet and engaging in a high level of physical activity can significantly lower the risk for alcohol-related liver mortality, even among all drinking patterns, including heavy and binge drinking, according to a new study from Indiana University researchers.

Notably, any amount of daily alcohol intake or binge drinking increases the liver mortality risk, the researchers found. However, that risk can be reduced somewhat with healthy dietary patterns and increased physical activity.

Although previous studies suggested that one or two drinks per day could be associated with lower risks for cardiovascular disease, cancer, or liver-related outcomes, other confounders and unmeasured lifestyle behaviors could vary significantly between consumers and influence their health risks, the researchers said.

“A significant knowledge gap exists regarding the interplay of dietary patterns and physical activity with alcohol-attributable liver-specific mortality,” said senior author Naga Chalasani, MD, AGAF, professor of gastroenterology and hepatology at the Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis.

“It is not well understood whether healthy diets or increased physical activity levels explain differences in liver-specific mortality risks between lifetime abstainers and light-to-moderate alcohol consumers,” he said. “More importantly, it remains unclear whether a healthy diet and physical activity can lower liver-specific mortality in individuals engaging in high-risk alcohol consumption, such as heavy or binge drinking.”  

The study was published online in the Journal of Hepatology.

 

Analyzing Alcohol-Related Effects

Chalasani and colleagues analyzed data from more than 60,000 adults in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys for 1984-2018 and linked data in the National Death Index through December 2019.

The research team looked at self-reported alcohol use, diet quality based on the Healthy Eating Index, and physical activity levels. Heavy drinking was defined as more than three drinks per day for women and more than four drinks per day for men, while binge drinking was defined as four or more drinks per day for women and five or more drinks per day for men.

Physically active participants had at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity or 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity physical activity per week. Participants with healthier diets were in the top quartile of the Healthy Eating Index, which included diets high in vegetables, fruits, whole grains, seafood, plant-based proteins, and unsaturated fats, as well as diets low in solid fats, alcohol, and added sugars.

During a 12-year follow-up period, 12,881 deaths were reported, including 252 related to liver disease. An increased risk for liver-related death was associated with older age, smoking, diabetes, higher BMI, waist circumference, average daily alcohol intake, and binge drinking.

Compared to nondrinkers, those with daily alcohol intake had an increased liver-specific mortality risk, with an adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio (aSHR) of 1.04 for men and 1.08 for women.

Binge drinking had an even greater liver mortality risk, with an aSHR of 1.52 for men and 2.52 for women, than nonbinge drinking.

In contrast, a healthier diet — among those at the top quartile of the Healthy Eating Index — had a lower liver mortality risk in nonheavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.35), heavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.14), and binge drinkers (aSHR, 0.16).

In addition, physically active participants had a lower liver mortality risk for nonheavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.52), heavy drinkers (aSHR, 0.64), and binge drinkers (aSHR, 0.31).

Overall, the benefits of higher diet quality and physical activity were substantially greater in women than in men, the researchers found.

“The uniqueness of our study lies in its ability to simultaneously assess the moderating effects of two important lifestyle behaviors on liver mortality risk across different levels and patterns of alcohol consumption in a representative US population, offering a more nuanced and complete view of the risks of drinking,” Chalasani said.

 

Messaging From Clinicians to Patients

Despite some attenuation from a healthy diet and physical activity, alcohol consumption still carries an increased liver mortality risk, the researchers noted. Economically disadvantaged groups face higher exposure to high-risk alcohol use, unhealthy diets, and physical activity — and as a result, increased liver mortality.

“This study challenges the long-held belief that light-to-moderate drinking might be safe for the liver. It shows that any level of alcohol raises risk, but healthy diet and exercise can meaningfully reduce that harm,” said Joseph Ahn, MD, AGAF, assistant professor of medicine in the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. 

“The results should change how we think about alcohol — not as something potentially protective, but as a risk factor that can be partly mitigated by lifestyle,” he said.

“The key takeaway is that there is no safe level of alcohol for liver health. Clinicians should move away from reassuring patients about ‘moderate’ drinking and instead stress both alcohol reduction and the protective role of diet and physical activity,” Ahn added. “The next step is bringing these insights into guidelines and patient counseling, especially for populations at higher risk.”

The study was funded by departmental internal funding. Chalasani declared having no conflicts of interest for this paper, but he disclosed paid consulting agreements with numerous pharmaceutical companies. Ahn reported having no disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

A colonoscopy technique involving repeat intubation of the sigmoid colon significantly improves detection of adenomas compared with conventional colonoscopy evaluations, new research showed.

“After eliminating the impact of time, the adenoma-detection rate [with a second intubation vs standard withdrawal] was still significantly increased, indicating that the second intubation technique could enhance the visualization of the sigmoid colon mucosa and reduce the rate of missed lesions,” reported the authors of the study, published in The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

When precancerous polyps are removed during standard colonoscopies, as many as 70%-90% of colorectal cancers can be prevented; however, rates of missed polyps during colonoscopy are notoriously high.

Recent studies have shown improved adenoma-detection rates with the use of Endocuff, water-assisted colonoscopy, full-spectrum endoscopy, and repeat withdrawal examinations, which include retroflexion and forward-viewing methods.

The repeat colonoscopy examinations may represent “the easiest and most practical option for endoscopists as they do not require additional tools, staff, or funding,” the authors explained.

However, most studies on the issue have focused mainly on the right colon and forward-viewing examinations, whereas the sigmoid colon, which has the most turns and is the most easily compressed, can be easily missed during withdrawal observation.

To investigate if use of a second colon intubation of the sigmoid colon could improve detection rates, senior author Jianning Yao, MD, of the Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China, conducted a randomized trial, enrolling 650 patients between December 2023 and April 2024 who were aged 45 or older and had overweight or obesity (BMI ≥ 24).

At the time of the first withdrawal during the colonoscopy, the patients were randomized 1:1 to groups of 325 each to either receive standard withdrawal, with withdrawal to the anus, or to receive a second intubation, with reinsertion into the sigmoid colon.

In the second intubation, the colonoscope was pushed forward without straightening, “allowing for slight looping that could be used to flatten the colonic folds as the tip of the instrument was advanced,” they explained.

The patients had a mean age of 55; about 25% had a smoking habit, and the mean BMI was about 28. There were no significant differences in other baseline characteristics.

The results showed that patients in the second-intubation group vs standard-withdrawal group had a substantially higher adenoma-detection rate (24.3% vs 14.5%) and polyp-detection rate (29.2% vs 17.8%, P = .001 for both) in the sigmoid colon.

In the second-intubation group, 85% of the adenomas discovered throughout the second inspection in the sigmoid colon were 5 mm or smaller in size. In addition, 90% of the 40 adenomas were somewhat raised or pedunculated, and all were tubular adenomas.

No high-grade dysplasia adenomas were discovered.

Of note, the colonoscopy in the second-intubation group’s colonoscopic examinations took just 1.47 minute longer overall than the standard-withdrawal group’s examinations.

Factors that were determined in a multivariate analysis to be independent predictors of higher adenoma detection in the second-intubation group included older age, smoking habit, longer duration of the second inspection, and the identification of lesions during the initial withdrawal from the sigmoid colon.

Patients’ vital signs were monitored at intervals of 3 minutes throughout the colonoscopy procedure, and patients were followed up to monitor for any adverse events occurring within 2 weeks after the examination, with no notable disparities observed between the two groups.

 

Alternative to AKS Approach in Second Intubation

The authors explained that, in their approach in the second intubation, the common axis-keeping shortening (AKS) was not utilized, and instead they pushed the colonoscope forward without straightening it, which offers important advantages.

“In this way, slight looping of the colonoscope can be used to flatten the colonic folds as the tip of the instrument is advanced, thereby achieving an observation effect that cannot be reached by any number of withdrawal examinations.”

In general, the stimulation of peristalsis during a second examination allows for the observation of the colonic mucosa from different angles, thereby reducing the rate of missed lesions, the authors added.

“Although the detection of these lesions may not significantly affect clinical outcomes, it serves as a reminder for patients regarding regular follow-ups and lifestyle adjustments,” they explained. “Additionally, it may reduce the likelihood of missing some smaller lesions that progress rapidly, such as de novo cancer.”

Based on the results, the authors concluded that older patients, patients who smoke, or those with lesions found on the first sigmoid inspection have a higher chance of having missed adenomas discovered in the sigmoid colon during the second intubation examination.

“If one of these risk factors is present, a second examination of the sigmoid colon may be considered to detect missed lesions,” they said.

The added time commitment of just 1.47 minutes can be a worthwhile tradeoff, they added.

“Considering the improvements in the adenoma-detection rate provided by the second intubation, this modest time increase may be acceptable.”

The authors had no disclosures to report.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

A colonoscopy technique involving repeat intubation of the sigmoid colon significantly improves detection of adenomas compared with conventional colonoscopy evaluations, new research showed.

“After eliminating the impact of time, the adenoma-detection rate [with a second intubation vs standard withdrawal] was still significantly increased, indicating that the second intubation technique could enhance the visualization of the sigmoid colon mucosa and reduce the rate of missed lesions,” reported the authors of the study, published in The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

When precancerous polyps are removed during standard colonoscopies, as many as 70%-90% of colorectal cancers can be prevented; however, rates of missed polyps during colonoscopy are notoriously high.

Recent studies have shown improved adenoma-detection rates with the use of Endocuff, water-assisted colonoscopy, full-spectrum endoscopy, and repeat withdrawal examinations, which include retroflexion and forward-viewing methods.

The repeat colonoscopy examinations may represent “the easiest and most practical option for endoscopists as they do not require additional tools, staff, or funding,” the authors explained.

However, most studies on the issue have focused mainly on the right colon and forward-viewing examinations, whereas the sigmoid colon, which has the most turns and is the most easily compressed, can be easily missed during withdrawal observation.

To investigate if use of a second colon intubation of the sigmoid colon could improve detection rates, senior author Jianning Yao, MD, of the Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China, conducted a randomized trial, enrolling 650 patients between December 2023 and April 2024 who were aged 45 or older and had overweight or obesity (BMI ≥ 24).

At the time of the first withdrawal during the colonoscopy, the patients were randomized 1:1 to groups of 325 each to either receive standard withdrawal, with withdrawal to the anus, or to receive a second intubation, with reinsertion into the sigmoid colon.

In the second intubation, the colonoscope was pushed forward without straightening, “allowing for slight looping that could be used to flatten the colonic folds as the tip of the instrument was advanced,” they explained.

The patients had a mean age of 55; about 25% had a smoking habit, and the mean BMI was about 28. There were no significant differences in other baseline characteristics.

The results showed that patients in the second-intubation group vs standard-withdrawal group had a substantially higher adenoma-detection rate (24.3% vs 14.5%) and polyp-detection rate (29.2% vs 17.8%, P = .001 for both) in the sigmoid colon.

In the second-intubation group, 85% of the adenomas discovered throughout the second inspection in the sigmoid colon were 5 mm or smaller in size. In addition, 90% of the 40 adenomas were somewhat raised or pedunculated, and all were tubular adenomas.

No high-grade dysplasia adenomas were discovered.

Of note, the colonoscopy in the second-intubation group’s colonoscopic examinations took just 1.47 minute longer overall than the standard-withdrawal group’s examinations.

Factors that were determined in a multivariate analysis to be independent predictors of higher adenoma detection in the second-intubation group included older age, smoking habit, longer duration of the second inspection, and the identification of lesions during the initial withdrawal from the sigmoid colon.

Patients’ vital signs were monitored at intervals of 3 minutes throughout the colonoscopy procedure, and patients were followed up to monitor for any adverse events occurring within 2 weeks after the examination, with no notable disparities observed between the two groups.

 

Alternative to AKS Approach in Second Intubation

The authors explained that, in their approach in the second intubation, the common axis-keeping shortening (AKS) was not utilized, and instead they pushed the colonoscope forward without straightening it, which offers important advantages.

“In this way, slight looping of the colonoscope can be used to flatten the colonic folds as the tip of the instrument is advanced, thereby achieving an observation effect that cannot be reached by any number of withdrawal examinations.”

In general, the stimulation of peristalsis during a second examination allows for the observation of the colonic mucosa from different angles, thereby reducing the rate of missed lesions, the authors added.

“Although the detection of these lesions may not significantly affect clinical outcomes, it serves as a reminder for patients regarding regular follow-ups and lifestyle adjustments,” they explained. “Additionally, it may reduce the likelihood of missing some smaller lesions that progress rapidly, such as de novo cancer.”

Based on the results, the authors concluded that older patients, patients who smoke, or those with lesions found on the first sigmoid inspection have a higher chance of having missed adenomas discovered in the sigmoid colon during the second intubation examination.

“If one of these risk factors is present, a second examination of the sigmoid colon may be considered to detect missed lesions,” they said.

The added time commitment of just 1.47 minutes can be a worthwhile tradeoff, they added.

“Considering the improvements in the adenoma-detection rate provided by the second intubation, this modest time increase may be acceptable.”

The authors had no disclosures to report.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

A colonoscopy technique involving repeat intubation of the sigmoid colon significantly improves detection of adenomas compared with conventional colonoscopy evaluations, new research showed.

“After eliminating the impact of time, the adenoma-detection rate [with a second intubation vs standard withdrawal] was still significantly increased, indicating that the second intubation technique could enhance the visualization of the sigmoid colon mucosa and reduce the rate of missed lesions,” reported the authors of the study, published in The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

When precancerous polyps are removed during standard colonoscopies, as many as 70%-90% of colorectal cancers can be prevented; however, rates of missed polyps during colonoscopy are notoriously high.

Recent studies have shown improved adenoma-detection rates with the use of Endocuff, water-assisted colonoscopy, full-spectrum endoscopy, and repeat withdrawal examinations, which include retroflexion and forward-viewing methods.

The repeat colonoscopy examinations may represent “the easiest and most practical option for endoscopists as they do not require additional tools, staff, or funding,” the authors explained.

However, most studies on the issue have focused mainly on the right colon and forward-viewing examinations, whereas the sigmoid colon, which has the most turns and is the most easily compressed, can be easily missed during withdrawal observation.

To investigate if use of a second colon intubation of the sigmoid colon could improve detection rates, senior author Jianning Yao, MD, of the Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China, conducted a randomized trial, enrolling 650 patients between December 2023 and April 2024 who were aged 45 or older and had overweight or obesity (BMI ≥ 24).

At the time of the first withdrawal during the colonoscopy, the patients were randomized 1:1 to groups of 325 each to either receive standard withdrawal, with withdrawal to the anus, or to receive a second intubation, with reinsertion into the sigmoid colon.

In the second intubation, the colonoscope was pushed forward without straightening, “allowing for slight looping that could be used to flatten the colonic folds as the tip of the instrument was advanced,” they explained.

The patients had a mean age of 55; about 25% had a smoking habit, and the mean BMI was about 28. There were no significant differences in other baseline characteristics.

The results showed that patients in the second-intubation group vs standard-withdrawal group had a substantially higher adenoma-detection rate (24.3% vs 14.5%) and polyp-detection rate (29.2% vs 17.8%, P = .001 for both) in the sigmoid colon.

In the second-intubation group, 85% of the adenomas discovered throughout the second inspection in the sigmoid colon were 5 mm or smaller in size. In addition, 90% of the 40 adenomas were somewhat raised or pedunculated, and all were tubular adenomas.

No high-grade dysplasia adenomas were discovered.

Of note, the colonoscopy in the second-intubation group’s colonoscopic examinations took just 1.47 minute longer overall than the standard-withdrawal group’s examinations.

Factors that were determined in a multivariate analysis to be independent predictors of higher adenoma detection in the second-intubation group included older age, smoking habit, longer duration of the second inspection, and the identification of lesions during the initial withdrawal from the sigmoid colon.

Patients’ vital signs were monitored at intervals of 3 minutes throughout the colonoscopy procedure, and patients were followed up to monitor for any adverse events occurring within 2 weeks after the examination, with no notable disparities observed between the two groups.

 

Alternative to AKS Approach in Second Intubation

The authors explained that, in their approach in the second intubation, the common axis-keeping shortening (AKS) was not utilized, and instead they pushed the colonoscope forward without straightening it, which offers important advantages.

“In this way, slight looping of the colonoscope can be used to flatten the colonic folds as the tip of the instrument is advanced, thereby achieving an observation effect that cannot be reached by any number of withdrawal examinations.”

In general, the stimulation of peristalsis during a second examination allows for the observation of the colonic mucosa from different angles, thereby reducing the rate of missed lesions, the authors added.

“Although the detection of these lesions may not significantly affect clinical outcomes, it serves as a reminder for patients regarding regular follow-ups and lifestyle adjustments,” they explained. “Additionally, it may reduce the likelihood of missing some smaller lesions that progress rapidly, such as de novo cancer.”

Based on the results, the authors concluded that older patients, patients who smoke, or those with lesions found on the first sigmoid inspection have a higher chance of having missed adenomas discovered in the sigmoid colon during the second intubation examination.

“If one of these risk factors is present, a second examination of the sigmoid colon may be considered to detect missed lesions,” they said.

The added time commitment of just 1.47 minutes can be a worthwhile tradeoff, they added.

“Considering the improvements in the adenoma-detection rate provided by the second intubation, this modest time increase may be acceptable.”

The authors had no disclosures to report.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Routine screening for Helicobacter pylori in patients hospitalized for myocardial infarction (MI) did not significantly reduce the risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding overall — but benefits were seen in high-risk subgroups, according to the HELP-MI SWEDEHEART trial published in JAMA and presented at the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Congress 2025.

Bleeding in the upper gastrointestinal tract is a common complication after MI. It increases morbidity and mortality itself but can also reduce the effectiveness of antithrombotic treatments and lead to new cardiovascular events. It is often related to infection with H. pylori, the bacterium that can cause stomach inflammation, ulcers, and cancer, said Robin Hofmann, MD, PhD, a cardiologist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, who presented the trial results.Hofmann and his colleagues wondered whether screening for the bacterium using a simple urea breath test would help reduce the risk for bleeds. Using Sweden’s national SWEDEHEART registry, researchers performed a cluster-randomized crossover trial of more than 18,000 patients with MI at 35 Swedish hospitals. They found that screening for H. pylori reduced the risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding by 10%, but the results were not statistically significant.

Several factors may have contributed to the neutral result, noted Hofmann. Just 70% of the people in the screening population were actually screened — though he said that is a fairly good number for a diagnostic test. A relatively small number, around 23%, were positive for H. pylori, a much lower rate than in many other parts of the world, and about 25% of participants in both arms of the trial were already taking proton pump inhibitors to reduce the risk for bleeding.

 

Signals of Benefit in High-Risk Patients

But in some high-risk subgroups, there was a clearer signal of benefit. Patients with anemia or kidney failure, for example, who are at higher risk for bleeding, saw a relative risk reduction of around 50% in the screening group — though the numbers were too small for formal statistical analysis.

“In unselected patients with myocardial infarction we could not show a significant reduction in bleeding,” said Hofmann. “But it’s very likely that there is a clinical effect, at least in those individuals at increased risk of bleeding.”

Discussant Paul Ridker, MD, a cardiologist at Harvard Medical School, Boston, said he agreed that the trial was technically neutral but clinically positive. He noted that in every subgroup, the trend was in the direction of benefit, with only the top end of the cardiac indices crossing over into no benefit. And the benefit appeared larger among high-risk patients with anemia or kidney failure.

“These are the very patients I’m most concerned about and don’t want to bleed,” he said.Because the urea breath test and eradication therapy are simple, safe, and inexpensive, Hofmann said he thinks there is “good evidence to recommend H. pylori screening in patients at higher risk of bleeding.”

“I’m very sure from a clinical perspective that we will be able to identify the groups that are low-hanging fruit,” he said. “But the guideline committees will have to decide if this evidence is enough.”

Hofmann and Ridker reported having no financial conflicts of interest.

 

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Routine screening for Helicobacter pylori in patients hospitalized for myocardial infarction (MI) did not significantly reduce the risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding overall — but benefits were seen in high-risk subgroups, according to the HELP-MI SWEDEHEART trial published in JAMA and presented at the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Congress 2025.

Bleeding in the upper gastrointestinal tract is a common complication after MI. It increases morbidity and mortality itself but can also reduce the effectiveness of antithrombotic treatments and lead to new cardiovascular events. It is often related to infection with H. pylori, the bacterium that can cause stomach inflammation, ulcers, and cancer, said Robin Hofmann, MD, PhD, a cardiologist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, who presented the trial results.Hofmann and his colleagues wondered whether screening for the bacterium using a simple urea breath test would help reduce the risk for bleeds. Using Sweden’s national SWEDEHEART registry, researchers performed a cluster-randomized crossover trial of more than 18,000 patients with MI at 35 Swedish hospitals. They found that screening for H. pylori reduced the risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding by 10%, but the results were not statistically significant.

Several factors may have contributed to the neutral result, noted Hofmann. Just 70% of the people in the screening population were actually screened — though he said that is a fairly good number for a diagnostic test. A relatively small number, around 23%, were positive for H. pylori, a much lower rate than in many other parts of the world, and about 25% of participants in both arms of the trial were already taking proton pump inhibitors to reduce the risk for bleeding.

 

Signals of Benefit in High-Risk Patients

But in some high-risk subgroups, there was a clearer signal of benefit. Patients with anemia or kidney failure, for example, who are at higher risk for bleeding, saw a relative risk reduction of around 50% in the screening group — though the numbers were too small for formal statistical analysis.

“In unselected patients with myocardial infarction we could not show a significant reduction in bleeding,” said Hofmann. “But it’s very likely that there is a clinical effect, at least in those individuals at increased risk of bleeding.”

Discussant Paul Ridker, MD, a cardiologist at Harvard Medical School, Boston, said he agreed that the trial was technically neutral but clinically positive. He noted that in every subgroup, the trend was in the direction of benefit, with only the top end of the cardiac indices crossing over into no benefit. And the benefit appeared larger among high-risk patients with anemia or kidney failure.

“These are the very patients I’m most concerned about and don’t want to bleed,” he said.Because the urea breath test and eradication therapy are simple, safe, and inexpensive, Hofmann said he thinks there is “good evidence to recommend H. pylori screening in patients at higher risk of bleeding.”

“I’m very sure from a clinical perspective that we will be able to identify the groups that are low-hanging fruit,” he said. “But the guideline committees will have to decide if this evidence is enough.”

Hofmann and Ridker reported having no financial conflicts of interest.

 

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Routine screening for Helicobacter pylori in patients hospitalized for myocardial infarction (MI) did not significantly reduce the risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding overall — but benefits were seen in high-risk subgroups, according to the HELP-MI SWEDEHEART trial published in JAMA and presented at the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Congress 2025.

Bleeding in the upper gastrointestinal tract is a common complication after MI. It increases morbidity and mortality itself but can also reduce the effectiveness of antithrombotic treatments and lead to new cardiovascular events. It is often related to infection with H. pylori, the bacterium that can cause stomach inflammation, ulcers, and cancer, said Robin Hofmann, MD, PhD, a cardiologist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, who presented the trial results.Hofmann and his colleagues wondered whether screening for the bacterium using a simple urea breath test would help reduce the risk for bleeds. Using Sweden’s national SWEDEHEART registry, researchers performed a cluster-randomized crossover trial of more than 18,000 patients with MI at 35 Swedish hospitals. They found that screening for H. pylori reduced the risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding by 10%, but the results were not statistically significant.

Several factors may have contributed to the neutral result, noted Hofmann. Just 70% of the people in the screening population were actually screened — though he said that is a fairly good number for a diagnostic test. A relatively small number, around 23%, were positive for H. pylori, a much lower rate than in many other parts of the world, and about 25% of participants in both arms of the trial were already taking proton pump inhibitors to reduce the risk for bleeding.

 

Signals of Benefit in High-Risk Patients

But in some high-risk subgroups, there was a clearer signal of benefit. Patients with anemia or kidney failure, for example, who are at higher risk for bleeding, saw a relative risk reduction of around 50% in the screening group — though the numbers were too small for formal statistical analysis.

“In unselected patients with myocardial infarction we could not show a significant reduction in bleeding,” said Hofmann. “But it’s very likely that there is a clinical effect, at least in those individuals at increased risk of bleeding.”

Discussant Paul Ridker, MD, a cardiologist at Harvard Medical School, Boston, said he agreed that the trial was technically neutral but clinically positive. He noted that in every subgroup, the trend was in the direction of benefit, with only the top end of the cardiac indices crossing over into no benefit. And the benefit appeared larger among high-risk patients with anemia or kidney failure.

“These are the very patients I’m most concerned about and don’t want to bleed,” he said.Because the urea breath test and eradication therapy are simple, safe, and inexpensive, Hofmann said he thinks there is “good evidence to recommend H. pylori screening in patients at higher risk of bleeding.”

“I’m very sure from a clinical perspective that we will be able to identify the groups that are low-hanging fruit,” he said. “But the guideline committees will have to decide if this evidence is enough.”

Hofmann and Ridker reported having no financial conflicts of interest.

 

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.