Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39856782›Full record

ArticleAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2025

The Impact of Postoperative Prophylactic Medication on Long-Term Surgical, Severe Endoscopic and Endoscopic or Radiologic Recurrence Following Primary Ileocecal Resection in Patients With Crohn's Disease.

Sebastiaan Ten Bokkel Huinink, Michiel T J Bak, Evelien M J Beelen, Nicole S Erler, Mark S Silverberg, Matthieu Allez, Frank Hoentjen, Alexander G L Bodelier, Gerard Dijkstra, Marielle Romberg-Camps and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Sebastiaan Ten Bokkel HuininkDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0618-3018
Michiel T J BakDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8515-425X
Evelien M J BeelenDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Nicole S ErlerDepartment of Biostatistics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Mark S SilverbergDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Matthieu AllezGastroenterology Department, Hôpital Saint-Louis-APHP, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2012-7522
Frank HoentjenDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5314-4452
Alexander G L BodelierDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands.
Gerard DijkstraDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Marielle Romberg-CampsDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands.
Nanne K H de BoerDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Laurents P S StassenDepartment of Surgery, Maastricht Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Andrea E van der Meulen-de JongDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Rachel L WestDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Sint Franciscus Gasthuis & Vlietland, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
C Janneke van der WoudeDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Oddeke van RulerDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Annemarie C de VriesDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Dutch Initiative on Crohn and Colitis (ICC)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe impact of prophylactic medication following ileocecal resection (ICR) for Crohn's disease (CD) merits further elucidation. Prophylactic medication following ileocecal resection (ICR) is recommended in patients with Crohn's disease (CD), particularly in patients at increased risk of recurrence, but the impact on long-term outcomes needs to be further elucidated.

aimTo evaluate the effect of postoperative prophylactic medication on long-term prognosis.

methodsA retrospective cohort study was performed in patients with CD who underwent primary ICR between 2000-2020 in the Netherlands. Patients were divided into two groups: postoperative prophylactic medication [< 12 weeks following ICR] versus no postoperative prophylactic medication. Outcomes were surgical recurrence [re-resection for CD], severe endoscopic recurrence [modified Rutgeerts score (mRS) ≥ i3] and endoscopic or radiologic recurrence [mRS ≥ i2b or radiologic recurrence]. Inverse probability of treatment weighting [IPTW] method was used to adjust for confounding and selection bias. Survival and association between postoperative prophylactic medication and outcomes were assessed with Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazard models.

results807 patients underwent ICR (median follow-up 5.0 years); 36% received postoperative prophylactic medication. Surgical, severe endoscopic and endoscopic or radiologic recurrence rates were significantly lower in those who received prophylactic medication (p = 0.01; p < 0.01; p < 0.01). IPTW analysis showed a lower risk of severe endoscopic and endoscopic or radiologic recurrence in patients treated with postoperative prophylactic medication (aOR 0.64; 95% CI 0.43-0.97; aOR 0.65; 95% CI 0.47-0.91), which also was identified as a protective factor for severe endoscopic (aHR 0.5; 95% CI 0.4-0.6) and endoscopic or radiologic recurrence (aHR 0.6, 95% CI 0.5-0.7) in multivariable analysis after correction for confounding factors. A comparable protective effect of postoperative prophylactic medication was sustained in patients who underwent ileocolonoscopy <1 year postoperatively and who underwent surgery on or after 2010.

conclusionsProphylactic medication following primary ICR significantly reduces long-term recurrence rates in CD and was identified as a protective factor for severe endoscopic and endoscopic or radiologic recurrence.

Indexed as

CecumCrohn DiseaseIleumAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPostoperative CareRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultCrohn's diseaseintestinal surgerypostoperative recurrenceprophylactic medication

Identifiers

PMID39856782
PMCPMC11869158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.