Faculty Bibliography

Background/UNASSIGNED:Endoscopic evaluation with biopsies are instrumental in the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal (GI) disorders in the setting of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), especially in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Methods/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective chart review of 304 HIV-positive and 199 HIV-negative patients who had undergone upper and/or lower endoscopy in an urban community hospital from the years 2012 - 2017 was performed. Inclusion criteria included men and women between the ages of 45 to 75 years, which had undergone colonoscopies between within 2012 - 2017 and had tested positive for HIV. They were selected from that population if they had complete charts that included information regarding symptoms, viral load, cluster of differentiation 4 (CD4) count, prescribed HAART medication, findings from the upper and lower colonoscopy both from the gastroenterologist's report and pathologist's report. Only then would they be added to the pool of final selection that we could compute data from and draw conclusions. Results/UNASSIGNED:) infection, and esophagitis were significantly less common, while Candida esophagitis was more common. Among HIV patients taking different HAART regimens, the prevalence of peptic ulcers was significantly higher in those taking IIs than that in those who were not. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Physicians should consider the possibility that the GI symptoms in HIV-infected patients on HAART may be due to an opportunistic infection, even when the CD4 count is more than 200 cells/µL and the viral load is low.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB) has been traditionally used for making a tissue diagnosis. Several newer techniques are emerging as a viable alternative to EUS-FNA/FNB, including mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB), with a view to increasing the diagnostic yield for upper gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial tumors (SETs). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the overall diagnostic yield of MIAB for upper GI SETs. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Multiple electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar) and conference abstracts were comprehensively searched. The primary outcome of our meta-analysis was the overall diagnostic yield of the MIAB. The secondary outcome was to study complications in terms of perforation and clinically significant bleeding. The meta-analysis was performed using a DerSimonian and Laird random-effect model. Results/UNASSIGNED:=57.43%) and no perforations were reported. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:MIAB is a safe and effective technique for the diagnosis of upper GI SETs and can be considered as a viable alternative to EUS-FNA/FNB. MIAB can be performed during routine endoscopy and no advanced equipment is required.

A double or accessory common bile duct (ACBD) is a rare congenital anomaly. We report the case of a 60-year-old American Asian male, who was found to have a double or duplicated common bile duct after being admitted for evaluation of a pancreatic mass. A duplicated bile duct has the same mucosa histologically as a single bile duct. However, the opening of a duplicated bile duct lacks a sphincter allowing retrograde flow of gut contents which results in a higher probability of intraductal calculus formation. On rare occasions, it can predispose to liver abscesses, pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, gallbladder cancer, gastric cancer, and ampullary cancer depending on the location of the opening of the ACBD. We present an integrative review of the limited cases of ACBD with correlation to the current case and discussion regarding the aspects of diagnosis and management.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Numerous endoscopic assist devices exist, yet data surrounding their comparative efficacy is lacking. We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analysis to determine the comparative efficacy of endoscopic assist devices on colonic adenoma detection. METHODS:A systematic search was performed using multiple electronic databases through July 2020, to identify all randomized controlled trials and dual-arm observational studies compared with either other endoscopic assist devices and/or standard colonoscopy. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR). Secondary outcomes included polyp detection rate (PDR), serrated adenoma detection rate (SADR), right-sided adenoma detection rate (RADR), and proximal adenoma detection rate (PADR). RESULTS:Fifty-seven studies (31,051 patients) met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Network meta-analysis identified an enhanced ADR among (clear) cap [odds ratio (OR): 2.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.45-4.99], endocuff, (OR: 4.95, 95% CI: 3.15-7.78), and endoring (OR: 3.68, 95% CI: 1.47-9.20)-with no significant difference amongst any particular device. Similar findings for PDR were also seen. Enhanced SADR was identified for endocuff (OR: 9.43) and endoring (OR: 4.06) compared with standard colonoscopy. Enhanced RADR (OR: 5.36) and PADR (OR: 3.78) were only identified for endocuff. Endocuff comparatively demonstrated the greatest ADR, PDR, and SADR, but this was not significant when compared with the other assist devices. Subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials identified enhanced PDR and ADR for both cap and endocuff. CONCLUSIONS:Endoscopic assist devices displayed increased ADR and PDR as compared with standard colonoscopy and thus should be widely adopted. A nonsignificant trend was seen toward higher efficacy for the endocuff device.

Video 1Extraluminal bullet retrieval.

OBJECTIVES:The Institute of Medicine (IOM) defines diagnostic error as the failure to establish an accurate or timely explanation for the patient's health problem(s) or effectively communicate the explanation to the patient. Using this definition, we sought to characterize diagnostic errors experienced by patients and describe patient perspectives on causes, impacts, and prevention strategies. METHODS:We conducted interviews of adults hospitalized at an academic medical center. We used the framework of the IOM definition of diagnostic error to perform thematic analysis of qualitative data. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize quantitative data. RESULTS:Based on the IOM's definition of diagnostic error, 27 of the 69 included patients reported at least one diagnostic error in the past 5 years. The errors were distributed evenly across the following three dimensions of the IOM definition: accuracy, communication, and timeliness. Limited time with doctors, communication, clinical assessment, and clinical management emerged as major themes for causes of diagnostic error and for strategies to reduce diagnostic error. Impacts of errors included emotional distress, adverse health outcomes, and impaired activities of daily living. CONCLUSIONS:This study uses the recent IOM definition of diagnostic error to provide insights into diagnostic error from the patient perspective. We found that diagnostic errors were commonly reported by hospitalized adults and have a profound impact on patients' well-being. Patients' insights regarding potential causes and prevention strategies may help identify opportunities to reduce diagnostic errors.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Anti-seizure medications are used to manage epilepsy and require long-term adherence to maintain therapeutic drug levels. We assessed adherence to levetiracetam and the use of a digital intervention to improve adherence in patients with epilepsy. METHODS:30 participants with epilepsy were randomized 1:1 either to a digital email adherence intervention or control group. All patients were provided levetiracetam equipped with electronic monitoring caps to assess patient adherence to medication. Patients were followed for 6 months, with return visits at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. RESULTS:Subjects randomized to the control arm (n = 15) took 66% of the prescribed doses compared to the intervention group, who took 65% of prescribed doses (n = 15). Nine participants did not complete the study. Of the twenty-one participants that completed the study, the overall rate of adherence was 72% of prescribed doses taken. Two subjects in the control group and three subjects in the intervention group were adherent every month of the study-taking at least 80% of prescribed doses. Those randomized to the control group took the correct number of doses 44% of days in the study, and those in the intervention group took the correct number of doses 37% of days. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Poor adherence to levetiracetam is common. An internet-based email survey intervention did not improve adherence to levetiracetam in epilepsy patients. Further advances in adherence are needed to help patients receive the maximum benefit of their medical treatments.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Rates of obesity are rising in patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. We conducted a US population-based study to determine the effects of obesity on outcomes in hospitalised patients with IBD. METHODS:We searched the Nationwide Readmissions Database 2016-2017 to identify all adult patients hospitalised for IBD, using ICD-10 codes. We compared obese (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 30) vs non-obese [BMI < 30] patients with IBD to evaluate the independent effects of obesity on readmission, mortality, and other hospital outcomes. Multivariate regression and propensity matching were performed. RESULTS:We identified 143 190 patients with IBD, of whom 9.1% were obese. Obesity was independently associated with higher all-cause readmission at 30 days {18% vs 13% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.16, p = 0.005)} and 90 days (29% vs 21% [aOR 1.27, p < 0.0001]), as compared with non-obese patients, with similar findings upon a propensity-matched sensitivity analysis. Obese and non-obese patients had similar risks of mortality on index admission [0.24% vs 0.31%, p = 0.18] and readmission [1.5% vs 1.8% p = 0.3]. Obese patients had longer [5.3 vs 4.9 days] and more expensive [USD12,195 vs USD11,154] hospitalisations on index admission. Obesity did not affect the risk of intestinal surgery or bowel obstruction. Compared with index admissions, readmissions were characterised by increased mortality [6-fold], health care use, and bowel obstruction [3-fold] [all p < 0.0001]. CONCLUSIONS:Obesity in IBD appears to be associated with increased early readmission, characterised by a higher burden, despite the introduction of weight-based therapeutics. Prevention of obesity should be a focus in the treatment of IBD to decrease readmission and health care burden.