Primary CT Angiography Vs Colonoscopy in Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage
Lipcsey, Megan S.; Stein, Daniel J.; Anand, Rajsavi; Moore, Matthew; Maheshwari, Rahul; Feuerstein, Joseph D.
Background and Aims: Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common cause of hospitalization and results in significant morbidity and cost. Advancements in computed tomography with angiography (CTA) imaging capability brings into question whether its use as a primary intervention for undifferentiated LGIB in place of colonoscopy could result in improved outcomes. Methods: Retrospective cohort analysis of admitted patients >18 years old who presented between January 2010 and August 2018 with an initial episode of LGIB who underwent colonoscopy or CTA as primary diagnostic intervention. Chi-square or Fisher's exact were used to compare primary outcomes of bleeding detection and intervention rates, t-test for length of stay (LOS) between CTA and colonoscopy. Logistic regression models were built to compare source identification and hemostatic intervention rate. Results: Of 258 total patients, 162 underwent initial colonoscopy vs 96 CTAs. When controlling for hypotension, anticoagulation, transfusions, and time to intervention, colonoscopy was associated with decreased LOS (5.00 vs 6.9, P = 0.001), a higher probability of source identification (OR 3.64, P < 0.001, CL 1.92-6.90) and hemostatic intervention (OR 8.62, P < 0.001, CI 3.54-21.0) compared to CTA. In a subgroup analysis of diverticular bleeds, CTA had higher rates of therapeutic intervention compared to colonoscopy (18% vs 3.8%, P < 0.001, OR 0.09, CI 0.02-0.46) without mortality benefit or shorter LOS. Conclusion: In patients with undifferentiated LGIB, colonoscopy as the primary modality for evaluation results in higher source identification, hemostatic intervention, and shorter LOS. In diverticular bleeds, early CTA was associated with increased hemostatic intervention rate.
SCOPUS:85121365672
ISSN: 2666-5107
CID: 5740992
Niacinamide May Be Associated with Improved Outcomes in COVID-19-Related Acute Kidney Injury: An Observational Study
Raines, Nathan H; Ganatra, Sarju; Nissaisorakarn, Pitchaphon; Pandit, Amar; Morales, Alex; Asnani, Aarti; Sadrolashrafi, Mehrnaz; Maheshwari, Rahul; Patel, Rushin; Bang, Vigyan; Shreyder, Katherine; Brar, Simarjeet; Singh, Amitoj; Dani, Sourbha S; Knapp, Sarah; Poyan Mehr, Ali; Brown, Robert S; Zeidel, Mark L; Bhargava, Rhea; Schlondorff, Johannes; Steinman, Theodore I; Mukamal, Kenneth J; Parikh, Samir M
BACKGROUND:AKI is a significant complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with no effective therapy. Niacinamide, a vitamin B3 analogue, has some evidence of efficacy in non-COVID-19-related AKI. The objective of this study is to evaluate the association between niacinamide therapy and outcomes in patients with COVID-19-related AKI. METHODS:on or off dialysis, with COVID-19-related AKI by Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria, in two hospitals with identical COVID-19 care algorithms, one of which additionally implemented treatment with niacinamide for COVID-19-related AKI. Patients on the niacinamide protocol (B3 patients) were compared against patients at the same institution before protocol commencement and contemporaneous patients at the non-niacinamide hospital (collectively, non-B3 patients). The primary outcome was a composite of death or RRT. RESULTS:interaction=0.03). CONCLUSIONS:Niacinamide was associated with lower risk of RRT/death and improved creatinine trajectory among patients with severe COVID-19-related AKI. Larger randomized studies are necessary to establish a causal relationship.
PMCID:8785722
PMID: 35368823
ISSN: 2641-7650
CID: 5740972