Seth Lipka

Impact of Diagnostic Delay and Other Risk Factors on Eosinophilic Esophagitis Phenotype and Esophageal Diameter.

Goals: Endoscopic features of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are variable with at least 2 phenotypes. The goal of this study was to classify adult EoE patients based on esophageal phenotype and diameter, and assess an association between demographical and clinical histories to define EoE phenotypes and overall disease progression. Methods: All consecutive patients with a confirmed diagnosis of EoE from 1988 to 2013 treated at University of South Florida were included. Patients were grouped into inflammatory or fibrostenotic phenotype, and further characterized by esophageal diameter: group 1 (6 to 9.9 mm), group 2 (10 to 16.9 mm), and group 3 (>17 mm—control). Significance level was set at 5%. Results: Sixty-four adult patients met inclusion criteria. Sixty-one percent of patients (39/64) were defined as fibrostenotic and 39% (25/64) as inflammatory phenotype. There was a significant difference in mean time of delayed diagnosis in patients with <10 mm esophageal diameter (14.8 y) and patients with a diameter of 10 to 16.9 mm (11.1 y) compared with patients with an esophageal diameter of ≥17 mm (5 y); P=0.002 and 0.006, respectively. Patients on aspirin with delayed diagnosis (>7 y) were significantly more likely to present with strictures (<10 mm) compared with nonaspirin users [odds ratio (OR=7.0; 95% confidence interval (CI), 7.2-31.3; P=0.008]. Similar results were found with non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs, smoking, and alcohol (OR=6.4; 95% CI, 1.6-26.4; P=0.01, OR=5.2; 95% CI, 1.4-20.1; P=0.02, and OR=6.4; 95% CI, 1.6-26.0; P=0.009), respectively. Conclusions: In our US population, a delay in diagnosis was shown to be associated with stricture formation in EoE confirming the Swiss experience. The results show the importance of reducing the diagnostic delay in EoE as there appears to be progression to fibrosis over time, aggravated by common medications and social habits.

Single versus double balloon enteroscopy for small bowel diagnostics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: Double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and single balloon enteroscopy (SBE) are 2 types of commonly used balloon-assisted enteroscopic techniques for “deep enteroscopy.” Although there are several randomized controlled trials assessing the superiority of DBE compared with SBE, the results from individual randomized controlled trials seem conflicting. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of DBE compared with SBE. Methods: Primary outcomes were diagnostic and therapeutic yield. Secondary outcomes were failure rates, adverse events, complete enteroscopy, anterograde/retrograde insertion depths, and procedure times. We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from inception until February 28, 2014, as well as other databases. For quality assurance purposes throughout the systematic review process, dual extraction was performed. The systematic review was performed as per the standards of Cochrane collaboration. Results: Four trials enrolling a total of 375 patients were included. DBE did not offer an advantage over SBE in therapeutic yield [risk ratio (RR), 1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90, 1.37; P=0.33)] or diagnostic yield (RR=1.08; 95% CI: 0.89, 1.32; P=0.42), failure rates (RR=0.68; 95% CI: 0.23, 2.05; P=0.5), overall adverse events (RR=1.41; 95% CI: 0.32, 6.3; P=0.65), or complete enteroscopy rates (RR=1.73; 95% CI: 0.86, 3.48; P=0.12). No evidence existed for an advantage of anterograde or retrograde procedure time between these 2 modalities [mean difference (MD), 3.78; 95% CI, −30.76, 38.32; P=0.83; and MD, −0.53; 95% CI: −7.66, 6.59; P=0.88, respectively]. Neither anterograde nor retrograde insertion depths appeared to differ between the 2 studies analyzed (MD, −7.36; 95% CI: −40.36, 25.64; P=0.66 and MD, 7.86; 95% CI: −12.68, 28.40; P=0.45, respectively). Conclusions: Performance of SBE and DBE appears to be similar in terms of diagnostic/therapeutic yield, insertion depths, procedure time, complete enteroscopy, failure rates, or adverse events.

Association between caffeine consumption and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Objectives: Caffeine consumption is reported to be associated with reduced hepatic fibrosis in patients with chronic liver diseases. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between caffeine consumption and prevalence or hepatic fibrosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in observational studies. Methods: We searched the literature of all languages from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library from 1 January 1980 through 10 January 2015. Total caffeine consumption was defined as the daily intake of caffeine (mg/day) from all caffeine-containing products. Combined and subgroup analyses stratified by study designs, study locations, and type of caffeine intake were performed. Results: Four cross-sectional and two case control studies with a total of 20,064 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. Among these, three studies with 18,990 subjects were included in the analysis for prevalence of NAFLD while the other three studies with 1074 subjects were for hepatic fibrosis. Total caffeine consumption (mg/day) was not significantly associated with either the prevalence [pooled mean difference (MD) 2.36; 95% confidence interval (CI) −35.92 to 40.64] or hepatic fibrosis (higher versus lower stages; pooled MD −39.95; 95% CI −132.72 to 52.82) of NAFLD. Subgroup analyses stratified by study designs and locations were also not significant. However, after stratifying by type of caffeine intake, regular coffee caffeine intake (mg/day) was significantly associated with reduced hepatic fibrosis of NAFLD (pooled MD −91.35; 95% CI −139.42 to −43.27; n = 2 studies). Conclusion: Although total caffeine intake is not associated with the prevalence or hepatic fibrosis of NAFLD, regular coffee caffeine consumption may significantly reduce hepatic fibrosis in patients with NAFLD.

Association between nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and colorectal adenoma: a systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is considered to be a hepatic manifestation of metabolic syndrome (MetS) and the most common chronic liver disease worldwide. The association between NAFLD and colorectal adenoma has been investigated in multiples studies but the results have been conflicting. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate this in asymptomatic patients who underwent screening colonoscopy. METHODS We searched the literatures of all languages from PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library from January 1, 1980 through July 15, 2014. Combined and subgroup analyses stratified by study designs, study locations, characteristics of adenoma (location, size, number, and advanced adenoma) were performed. RESULTS Four cross-sectional and one cohort studies with a total of 6,263 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. NAFLD was significantly associated with colorectal adenoma [pooled odds ratio (OR) 1.74, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.53-1.97]. The association was more significant in Asian population (pooled OR =1.77, 95% CI: 1.52-2.05, n=3 studies), compared to European/North American population (pooled OR =1.42, 95% CI: 0.75-2.67, n=2 studies). NAFLD was significantly associated with the number of colorectal adenoma (pooled OR =1.78, 95% CI: 1.10-2.86, n=2 studies), but not the location, size, or presence of advanced adenoma. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest NAFLD is significantly associated with the presence of colorectal adenoma in asymptomatic patients undergoing screening colonoscopy. This finding provides additional risk stratifications for applying colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies. However, more studies of western population are needed to further investigate the ethnic disparity.

The association of H. pylori and colorectal adenoma: does it exist in the US Hispanic population?

BACKGROUND Although data on the association between colorectal adenomas and Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) exists in White and Black patients, there is no data on this association in a US Hispanic population. Our aim was to study the association of adenoma detection and biopsy proven H. pylori infection in a cohort of US Hispanics. METHODS Data were collected from Nassau University Medical Center, a 530-bed tertiary care teaching hospital in East Meadow, New York. Patients who underwent both an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy from July 2009 to March 2011 were pulled from an electronic database. A total of 1,737 patients completed colonoscopies during this time with 95 excluded: 17 inflammatory bowel disease, 12 malignancy, 22 prior history of colorectal adenoma, and 44 incomplete. Among the colonoscopies, 799 patients had EGDs performed prior to colonoscopies that were eligible for our study. RESULTS H. pylori prevalence was highest in Hispanics 40.9%, followed by Blacks 29.1% (OR 0.59, 95% CI: 0.42-0.84), then Whites 7.9% (OR 0.12, 95% CI: 0.06-0.24). The adenoma detection rate was significantly higher in Whites 23.2% and Blacks 21.8% compared to Hispanics 14.5%, P=0.0002 respectively. Smoking and alcohol were lower in the H. pylori group, 18.6% (n=44) vs. 26.1% (n=147) for smoking (P=0.02) and 14.4% (n=34) vs. 19% (n=107) for alcohol (P=0.12), respectively. There was no evidence in the Hispanics for an association between adenoma detection and H. pylori infection. Furthermore size, location, and multiple polyps did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS While data has shown an association between H. pylori and colorectal adenomas, we did not find this in our Hispanic population. With the growing population of Hispanics in the U.S, large scale studies are needed to conclusively characterize the role of H. pylori infection in colorectal adenoma and adenocarcinoma in this group of patients.

Systematic review with network meta‐analysis: comparative effectiveness of topical steroids vs. PPIs for the treatment of the spectrum of eosinophilic oesophagitis

Controversy surrounds the clinical and histological response to topical steroids in patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE).

Inappropriate Use of Gastric Acid Suppression Therapy in Hospitalized Patients with Clostridium difficile—Associated Diarrhea: A Ten-Year Retrospective Analysis

Purpose. The incidence of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) has steadily increased over the past decade. A multitude of factors for this rise in incidence of CDAD have been postulated, including the increased use of gastric acid suppression therapy (GAST). Despite the presence of practice guidelines for use of GAST, studies have demonstrated widespread inappropriate use of GAST in hospitalized patients. We performed a retrospective analysis of inpatients with CDAD, with special emphasis placed on determining the appropriateness of GAST. Methods. A retrospective analysis was conducted at a multidisciplinary teaching hospital on inpatients with CDAD over a 10-year period. We assessed the use of GAST in the cases of CDAD. Data collection focused on the appropriate administration of GAST as defined by standard practice guidelines. Results. An inappropriate indication for GAST was not apparent in a majority (69.4%) of patients with CDAD. The inappropriate use of GAST was more prevalent in medical (86.1%) than on surgical services (13.9%) (P < 0.001). There were more cases (67.6%) of inappropriate use of GAST in noncritical care than in critical care areas (37.4%) (P < 0.001). Conclusion. Our study found that an inappropriate use of inpatient GAST in patients with CDAD was nearly 70 percent. Reduction of inappropriate use of GAST may be an additional approach to reduce the risk of CDAD and significantly decrease patient morbidity and healthcare costs.

A single-center United States experience with bleeding Dieulafoy lesions of the small bowel: diagnosis and treatment with single-balloon enteroscopy.

Introduction: A Dieulafoy lesion (DL) of the small bowel can cause severe gastrointestinal bleeding, and presents a difficult clinical setting for endoscopists. Limited data exists on the therapeutic yield of treating DLs of the small bowel using single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE). Methods: Data were collected from Tampa General Hospital a 1 018-bed teaching hospital affiliated with University of South Florida in Tampa, Florida. Patients were selected from a database of patients that underwent SBE from January 2010 – August 2013. Results: Eight patients were found to have DL an incidence of 2.6 % of 309 SBE performed for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. 7/8 were identified in the jejunum, with one found in the duodenum. The mean age of patients with DL was 71.5 years old. 6/8 patients were on some form of anticoagulant/antiplatelet agent. The primary modality of therapy employed was electrocautery, multipolar electrocoagulation in seven patients and APC (argon plasma coagulation) in one patient. In three patients, electrocoagulation was unsuccessful and hemostasis was achieved with clip placement. Three patients required repeat SBE with one found to have rebleeding from a failed clip with hemostasis achieved upon reapplication of one clip. Conclusion: In our United States’ experience, SBE offers a reasonable therapeutic approach to treat DL of the small bowel with low rates of rebleeding, no adverse events, and no patient requiring surgery.

Eosinophilic Enterocolitis Diagnosed by Means of Upper Endoscopy and Colonoscopy with Random Biopsies Treated with Budenoside: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

Intense infiltration of gastrointestinal and colonic mucosa with eosinophils or acidophilic gastroenteritis (EG) is a relatively uncommon picture for a pathologist endoscopist especially outside the pediatric age group and is highly suggestive of an ongoing chronic inflammatory process. Existing literature projected a hypothetical association with allergy but the exact pathophysiology is still unknown. Association with malabsorption, protein losing enteropathy, and refractory ulcers with gastrointestinal bleeding makes the clinical presentation more complicated. We present a unique case of diarrhea and abdominal pain in the clinical presentation with associated peripheral eosinophilia, asthma, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The patients symptoms abated after initiation of budesonide.

PPI Trial for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Chaos in the Community

Introduction: Despite consensus eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) statement published in 2011 calling for a 2-month trial of protons pump inhibitor (PPI), the guidelines are not followed by many. We studied the practice patterns in our community and response to a PPI retrial in patients previously diagnosed with “idiopathic EoE.” Methods: All patients presenting to the senior author’s practice with suspected EoE from 2011 to 2015. Two cohorts were studied: (1) patients diagnosed in the community as “idiopathic EoE”; (2) treatment naïve patients given a PPI trial at University of South Florida. PPI responsive eosinophilia was defined after 2 months of high dose PPIs after initial diagnosis of mucosal eosinophilia and histologic response of <15 eosinophils per HPF. SPSS v19.0 was used to calculate mean difference and odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals. Results: In total, 78 patients met inclusion criteria, 46 patients had outside diagnosis of “idiopathic EoE,” and 41 patients received a PPI trial at University of South Florida. In total, 34/46 (73.9%) community patients were placed on a PPI, 3/46 (6.5%) were placed on elimination diets, 31/46 (67.4%) steroids, and 21/46 (45.7%) were treated with both steroids/PPIs. Fewer patients received PPI trials in the community 3/46 (6.5%) versus 26/34 (76.5%) at our center [OR, 46.6 (95% CI, 11.3-191.5); P<0.0001]. In total, 12/26 (46.2%) were PPI responders on our retrial despite previously being diagnosed with idiopathic EoE. The group initially diagnosed at our center had a higher PPI response rate 12/15 (80%) versus 12/26 (46.2%) in the community group [OR, 7.58 (1.42, 40.55; P=0.018)]. Conclusions: The importance of a PPI trial is misunderstood and may be confused with the more traditional PPI trial for gastroesophageal reflux disease. This algorithm is critical and should be done before empiric steroids/diet therapies.