Momoko Tsuda

Background/Objectives: Ultrasonography (US) is a non-invasive and repeatable examination for evaluating chronic constipation. However, few studies have explored treatment decisions based on rectal US findings. To date, the efficacy and safety of elobixibat have not been evaluated using rectal US classification in patients with chronic constipation. This study aimed to evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of elobixibat in patients with chronic constipation classified as “no fecal retention” by rectal US. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 32 patients with chronic constipation who underwent rectal US and received elobixibat (10 mg/day) between May 2019 and December 2024. Rectal US findings classified patients into four groups: no fecal retention, fecal retention without hard stools, fecal retention with hard stools, and gas retention. The primary endpoint was the response rate of spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) within 3 days after starting elobixibat in the “no fecal retention” group. Results: Among 18 patients in the “no fecal retention” group, 94.4% achieved SBMs within 3 days, indicating a favorable short-term response. Adverse events included abdominal distension and abdominal pain, each observed in one patient (3.1%). Conclusions: Elobixibat was effective and well tolerated in patients with chronic constipation classified by rectal US findings.

Background/Objectives: Ultrasonography (US) is a non-invasive and repeatable examination for evaluating chronic constipation. However, only few studies have investigated drug therapy decisions based on rectal US results. To date, the efficacy and safety of elobixibat have not been evaluated using rectal US classification in patients with chronic constipation. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of elobixibat in patients with chronic constipation classified as “no fecal retention” by rectal US. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 32 patients with chronic constipation who underwent rectal US and received elobixibat (10 mg/day) between May 2019 and December 2024. Patients were classified into four groups according to rectal US findings: no fecal retention, fecal retention without hard stools, fecal retention with hard stools, and gas retention . The primary endpoint was the respon se rate of spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) within 3 days after starting elobixibat in the “no fecal retention” group. Results: Among 18 patients in the “no fecal retention” group, 94.4% achieved SBMs within 3 days after elobixibat administration, indicating a favorable response. Adverse events included abdominal distension and abdominal pain, each observed in one patient (3.1%). Conclusions: Elobixibat was effective and well tolerated in patients with chronic constipation classified by rectal US findings.

Chronic constipation is a common gastrointestinal disorder, and its management is critical. However, it is extremely difficult to assess its subjective symptoms when patients are unable to report them due to cognitive or physical disabilities, especially in cases of patients with incurable geriatric, pediatric, palliative, psychiatric, or neurological diseases. We had previously established a protocol for observing and assessing rectal fecal retention using ultrasonography and for classifying cases into three categories based on the rectal findings: no fecal retention, fecal retention without hard stools, and fecal retention with hard stools. However, although the detection of rectal fecal retention using ultrasonography would be expected to lead to better therapeutic management, there is no standard algorithm for selecting specific treatments and defecation care options based on ultrasonographic findings. Therefore, we organized an expert consensus meeting of multidisciplinary professionals to develop such an algorithm based on rectal ultrasonography findings for patients with constipation in both residential and hospital settings.

Although metastatic spread of breast cancer to the gastrointestinal tract is very rare, it is more likely to occur in invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) than in ductal carcinoma. Colonic metastasis is particularly rare, and the treatment strategies for these cases are not clearly defined. Herein, we report three cases of ILC with various abdominal symptoms associated with colonic metastasis. Case 1 A 70-year-old female patient with vomiting and melena was referred to our hospital. Endoscopic examination revealed a Dieulafoy ulcer in the rectum and an elevated lesion in the descending colon. She also had two breast nodules, and was diagnosed as ILC with colonic metastasis. Considering her general condition, the best supportive care (BSC) was offered. The patient died 4 months after confirmation of the diagnosis. Case 2 An 80-year-old female patient presented with diarrhea and vomiting. She was diagnosed with ILC with colonic metastasis, and a coloscopy revealed stenosis of the transverse colon with a metastatic lesion. Ileosigmoid bypass surgery was performed for intestinal obstruction, and systemic treatment for breast cancer was initiated. The patient developed peritoneal carcinomatosis and died 1 year and 2 months after surgery. Case 3 A 56-year-old female patient underwent left total mastectomy for ILC, and laparoscopic transverse colectomy was conducted for a colonic lesion 9 years and 2 months after. The diagnosis as colonic metastasis was not confirmed at that time. Two years and 2 months later, torose lesions were detected in the hepatic flexural and descending colon, and histopathological findings indicated that all colon tumors, including the previously resected tumor, were metastatic spread of ILC. Systemic treatment was continued, but the transverse colonic lesion penetrated the abdominal wall, and an abscess formed 2 years and 11 months after the resection. The fistula improved by continuous suction drainage following ileostomy but recurred, and the patient died 3 years and 8 months after colectomy. Colonic metastases from breast cancer can trigger various abdominal symptoms, and the prognosis in these cases is generally poor. In selected cases, surgical treatment for abdominal symptoms and subsequent systemic therapy can contribute to a prolonged prognosis.

Chronic constipation is a common gastrointestinal disorder in older adults, and it is very important to manage chronic constipation. However, evaluating these subjective symptoms is extremely difficult in cases where patients are unable to express their symptoms because of a cognitive or physical impairment. Hence, it is necessary to observe the patient’s colonic faecal retention using objective methods. Ultrasonography observation for colonic faecal retention is useful for diagnosing constipation and evaluating the effectiveness of treatment. Since there was no standard protocol for interpreting rectal ultrasonography findings, we developed an observation protocol through an expert consensus. We convened a group of experts in the diagnosis and evaluation of chronic constipation and ultrasonography to discuss and review the current literature on this matter. Together, they composed a succinct, evidence-based observation protocol for rectal faecal retention using ultrasonography. We created an observation protocol to enhance the quality and accuracy of diagnosis of chronic constipation, especially rectal constipation. This consensus statement is intended to serve as a guide for physicians, laboratory technicians and nurses who do not specialise in ultrasound or the diagnosis of chronic constipation.

For endoscopic interventions, heparin bridging therapy is recommended in patients who are at high risk from interruption of antithrombotic therapy. Although heparin bridging has been reported to be effective in preventing thrombosis, several reports have raised concerns about increased risk of bleeding. The aim of this study was to clarify complications of hepari bridging therapy in therapeutic endoscopy. A nationwide multicenter survey using questionnaire was performed about patients undergoing therapeutic endoscopy with heparin bridging. Patients who underwent therapeutic endoscopy without heparin bridging therapy were considered as controls. Compliance scores of heparin bridging therapy guideline were employed, and association was analyzed between the score and occurrence of post-procedural bleeding. The incidence of post-procedural bleeding was significantly higher (13.5 %, 33/245) in the heparin group compared with the control group (2.7 %, 299/11102)(p < 0.001). Thrombosis occurred in 1 patient each in the two groups. In the heparin group, post-procedural bleeding was more likely to be delayed bleeding. Dose adjustment of heparin was a significant factor contributing to bleeding. The compliance score of heparin bridging therapy guideline was significantly higher in those who suffered bleeding. Heparin bridging therapy significantly increased the risk of post-procedural bleeding compared with the control. The bleeding risk was associated with greater adherence with guidelines for heparin bridging therapy.