Navigating portal hypertension: Unlocking safe passage to healthy pregnancy in EHPVO.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pregnancy is associated with hyperdynamic circulatory state and increased risk of portal hypertension related complications in patients with extra-hepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO). We aim to study the impact of EHPVO on pregnancy-related outcomes with focus on subset of patients with UGIB (upper GI bleed). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of obstetric, maternal and neonatal outcomes of patients with EHPVO registered between January 2006 and December 2022. Forty-five patients were included. Forty-five healthy females with low-risk pregnancies formed the control group. RESULTS: Adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes were comparable between EHPVO and control group (22% vs. 28.6%; p > .05; low birth weight/ small for gestational age 17.8% vs. 36%, p = .0918 and 14.2% vs. 10%, p = .5698 respectively). Adverse outcomes were similar in patients with and without history of UGIB (26.3% vs. 19.4%, p = .0814; 17.8% vs. 36%, p = .0918; 14.2% vs. 10%, p = .5698). There was no maternal mortality in both the groups. A total of 7% pregnancies in EHPVO patients were complicated by ascites. CONCLUSIONS: EHPVO pregnancies have successful obstetric and neonatal outcomes with adequate management of portal hypertension.

Comparison of EPDS Scores Among Women with Good Neonatal Outcomes and Adverse Neonatal Outcomes.

A comparative, questionnaire-based study among postpartum patients was conducted using the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale. 80 women who had good neonatal outcomes were compared with 80 women who had adverse neonatal outcomes. Demographic characteristics were similar between the groups. The average EPDS score in those with good neonatal outcomes was lesser than that of those with adverse neonatal outcome (10.07 vs11.04, p 0.045). Using the cut-off value of 9, the proportion of women who tested positive (higher chance of PPD) was statistically significantly higher (p value 0.0488) in adverse neonatal outcomes group (45% vs 28.75%). This result showed that women who have experienced stillbirth/ neonatal mortality or had neonates who needed NICU care have a higher propensity for PPD. This implies that women who have experienced stillbirth/neonatal mortality should be considered for prioritization in screening for PPD. PPD screening, even if not done routinely, should be done in this selected group (adverse perinatal outcomes group) on priority.

A Randomized Trial Comparing the Specific Carbohydrate Diet to a Mediterranean Diet in Adults With Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: This study compared the effectiveness of the Specific Carbohydrate Diet (SCD) to the Mediterranean diet (MD) as treatment for Crohn's disease (CD) with mild to moderate symptoms. METHODS: Adult patients with CD and with mild-to-moderate symptoms were randomly assigned 1:1 to consume the MD or SCD for 12 weeks. For the first 6 weeks, participants received prepared meals and snacks according to their assigned diet. After 6 weeks, participants were instructed to follow the diet independently. The primary outcome was symptomatic remission at week 6. Key secondary outcomes at week 6 included fecal calprotectin (FC) response (FC <250 µg/g and reduction by >50% among those with baseline FC >250 µg/g) and C-reactive protein (CRP) response (high-sensitivity CRP <5 mg/L and >50% reduction from baseline among those with high-sensitivity CRP >5 mg/L). RESULTS: The study randomized 194 patients, and 191 were included in the efficacy analyses. The percentage of participants who achieved symptomatic remission at week 6 was not superior with the SCD (SCD, 46.5%; MD, 43.5%; P = .77). FC response was achieved in 8 of 23 participants (34.8%) with the SCD and in 4 of 13 participants (30.8%) with the MD (P = .83). CRP response was achieved in 2 of 37 participants (5.4%) with the SCD and in 1 of 28 participants (3.6%) with the MD (P = .68). CONCLUSIONS: The SCD was not superior to the MD to achieve symptomatic remission, FC response, and CRP response. CRP response was uncommon. Given these results, the greater ease of following the MD and other health benefits associated with the MD, the MD may be preferred to the SCD for most patients with CD with mild to moderate symptoms. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03058679.

Role of surface antibody in hepatitis B reactivation in patients with resolved infection and hematologic malignancy: A meta-analysis.

Patients with resolved hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection who are treated for hematological malignancies remain at risk for HBV reactivation. Because of conflicting studies about whether the antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) protects against reactivation in patients with resolved infection (hepatitis B surface antigen negative) receiving chemotherapy for hematological malignancies, we conducted a meta-analysis to determine if anti-HBs reduces HBV reactivation risk. We sought English-language studies through March 1, 2016, in Medline and other sources that examined reactivation in patients with resolved HBV infection receiving chemotherapy for hematologic malignancies. The absolute risks and odds ratio (OR) of reactivation with versus without anti-HBs were estimated in random-effects model meta-analyses. In 20 studies involving 1,672 patients not receiving antiviral prophylaxis, the reactivation risk was 14% (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.4%-19%) in 388 patients who had antibodies to hepatitis B core antigen only versus 5.0% (95% CI 3.0%-7.0%) in 1,284 patients who also had anti-HBs. Anti-HBs reduced reactivation risk with a pooled OR of 0.21 (95% CI 0.14-0.32) versus patients with antibody to hepatitis B core antigen only. Similar results were found when limiting the analysis to rituximab chemotherapy (OR = 0.19, 95% CI 0.11-0.32) and lymphoma (OR = 0.18, 95% CI 0.11-0.28). CONCLUSION: In patients with resolved HBV receiving chemotherapy for hematological malignancies without antiviral prophylaxis, anti-HBs positivity is associated with a decreased risk of reactivation; HBV screening in this patient population should include the routine use of anti-HBs, and those who are anti-HBs-negative should receive antiviral prophylaxis. Future studies should examine the effect of anti-HBs serum titers, the potential role for booster vaccinations, and antiviral prophylaxis prior to chemotherapy in this patient population. (Hepatology 2017;66:379-388).

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation and Prophylaxis During Solid Tumor Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Solid tumor chemotherapy regimens pose a risk for hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation, but screening and antiviral prophylaxis remains controversial because of insufficient evidence. PURPOSE: To determine the risk for HBV reactivation with and without antiviral prophylaxis and the effectiveness of prophylaxis in adults with solid tumors and chronic or resolved HBV infection. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE through 1 July 2015 and Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, TOXNET, and Scopus through 1 March 2015. STUDY SELECTION: 26 English-language observational studies and randomized, controlled trials in patients with chronic or resolved HBV receiving chemotherapy for solid tumors. DATA EXTRACTION: Study characteristics, quality, and risk of bias were assessed by 1 researcher and verified by another independent researcher. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random-effects model meta-analyses were used to estimate the risk and odds ratio (OR) of reactivation with versus without antiviral prophylaxis. Reactivation in chronic HBV without prophylaxis ranged from 4% to 68% (median, 25%) with substantial heterogeneity. Prophylaxis reduced the risk for HBV reactivation (OR, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.06 to 0.22]), HBV-related hepatitis (OR, 0.18 [CI, 0.10 to 0.32]), and chemotherapy interruption (OR, 0.10 [CI, 0.04 to 0.27]). In 3 studies of patients with resolved HBV infection, none received HBV prophylaxis and reactivation risk ranged from 0.3% to 9.0%. LIMITATIONS: Significant heterogeneity in underlying study populations and treatment regimens, incomplete baseline data, possibility of publication bias, and limited study quality. Most studies were observational and from Asia. CONCLUSION: In patients with chronic HBV receiving solid tumor chemotherapy, the risk for HBV reactivation is similar to the risk with other types of immunosuppressive therapy. Results support HBV screening and antiviral prophylaxis before initiation of chemotherapy for solid tumors. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences and National Institutes of Health.

Brain shift during bur hole-based procedures using interventional MRI.

UNLABELLED: OBJECT.: Brain shift during minimally invasive, bur hole-based procedures such as deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrode implantation and stereotactic brain biopsy is not well characterized or understood. We examine shift in various regions of the brain during a novel paradigm of DBS electrode implantation using interventional imaging throughout the procedure with high-field interventional MRI. METHODS: Serial MR images were obtained and analyzed using a 1.5-T magnet prior to, during, and after the placement of DBS electrodes via frontal bur holes in 44 procedures. Three-dimensional coordinates in MR space of unique superficial and deep brain structures were recorded, and the magnitude, direction, and rate of shift were calculated. Measurements were recorded to the nearest 0.1 mm. RESULTS: Shift ranged from 0.0 to 10.1 mm throughout all structures in the brain. The greatest shift was seen in the frontal lobe, followed by the temporal and occipital lobes. Shift was also observed in deep structures such as the anterior and posterior commissures and basal ganglia; shift in the pallidum and subthalamic region ipsilateral to the bur hole averaged 0.6 mm, with 9% of patients having over 2 mm of shift in deep brain structures. Small amounts of shift were observed during all procedures; however, the initial degree of shift and its direction were unpredictable. CONCLUSIONS: Brain shift is continual and unpredictable and can render traditional stereotactic targeting based on preoperative imaging inaccurate even in deep brain structures such as those used for DBS.

Use of computerized tests to evaluate psychomotor performance in children with specific learning disabilities in comparison to normal children.

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: Children with specific learning disabilities (SpLD) have an unexplained difficulty in acquiring basic academic skills resulting in a significant discrepancy between their academic potential and achievements. This study was undertaken to compare the performance on a battery of six psychomotor tests of children with SpLD and those without any learning disabilities (controls) using computerized tests. METHODS: In this study, 25 children with SpLD and 25 controls (matched for age, socio-economic status and medium of instruction) were given three training sessions over one week. Then children were asked to perform on the six computerized psychomotor tests. RESULTS were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Children with SpLD fared significantly worse on finger tapping test, choice reaction test, digit picture substitution test and card sorting test compared to the controls ( p <0.05). INTERPRETATION & CONCLUSIONS: Children with SpLD have impairment of psychomotor skills like attention, sensory-motor coordination and executive functioning. Further research is needed to evaluate if the remedial education plan results in improvement in psychomotor performance of children with SpLD on these selected tests.

The use of advanced imaging and representation of workers compensation in vertebral augmentation: a single-center comparison with the INVEST Trial.

BACKGROUND: Vertebral augmentation (VA) techniques have changed the paradigm of treatment during the past decade and involve injection of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cement directly into a compressed vertebral body. During the summer of 2009, the INVEST trial was one of 2 randomized controlled studies that reported equivalence between vertebroplasty and a control procedure.  OBJECTIVE: In this analysis, we sought to compare the subset of patients studied in the INVEST trial to a tertiary academic institution with respect to 2 variables: Workers compensation status and presence of advanced imaging prior to the procedure. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of 634 procedures. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 634 vertebral augmentation procedures at our institution between June 2004 and August 2008, overlapping with the dataset of the INVEST trial. The primary comparison was whether patients received Workers compensation and/or advanced imaging prior to the procedure. The study was IRB approved, and in accordance with HIPAA guidelines. RESULTS: There were 409 patients who underwent 634 procedures between June 2004 and August 2008. Among 634 procedures, only 3 included Workers compensation. Therefore, the majority of patients (> 99%) did not receive Workers compensation compared to the INVEST trial (11 - 13%). Similarly, in 629 out of 634 procedures (99.2%), patients underwent advanced imaging comprised of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT) or bone scan. LIMITATIONS: We simply looked at 2 elements of the patient demographic in a time-matched fashion and compared it to the U.S. based INVEST trial. It is possible that despite our diligent efforts to review the data set, we have inadvertently excluded some patients, the incorporation of whom might have changed the statistics. CONCLUSION: We reviewed our time-matched database in terms of 2 variables we thought curious in the INVEST trial.  In comparison to our practice, where advanced imaging is essentially required and Workers compensation largely not seen, these aspects of the INVEST trial's population stood out.

The use of vertebral augmentation and external beam radiation therapy in the multimodal management of malignant vertebral compression fractures.

BACKGROUND: Vertebral augmentation (VA) techniques such as vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty are increasingly performed minimally invasive procedures for osteoporotic or malignant compression fractures (MCFs) and involve injection of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cement directly into a compressed vertebral body. OBJECTIVE: This article will evaluate the efficacy of VA in relieving fracture-related pain. We also intend to identify procedural and clinical variables that could potentially influence outcomes in this population. In the subset of patients with cancer who received both external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and VA, we will assess the impact of the treatment sequence on pain outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective analysis of 201 cases of patients with cancer and MCFs who underwent one or more vertebral augmentation procedures at our institution between 2003 and 2009. The majority of cancers represented were multiple myeloma, metastatic lung cancer, and metastatic breast cancer. The primary outcome measure was pain relief, as measured by the Visual Analog Scale and a 4-point pain scale. SETTING: We present an institutional experience at an academic medical center of 201 cases of MCFs. METHODS: We compiled an institutional database of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty cases using paper and electronic medical records. Our data collection methodology has been previously reported and includes variables such as procedure dates, gender, age, type of malignancy, fracture etiology, history of cancer treatment, type of procedure performed, vertebral level treated, the number of levels treated per procedure, complications, and follow-up information on pain response. The updated dataset incorporates new variables including information on pain medications and standardized questionnaires such as the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). RESULTS: In the 201 cases of MCFs, a total of 316 vertebral levels were treated with either vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty. Follow-up data on pain relief was available for 190 out of 201 cases (95%). Among this subgroup, 168 cases (88%) with MCFs responded. Thirty-nine percent (39%) of the time patients experienced complete pain resolution. In only 4% of cases did patients report worsening of their fracture-related pain post-procedure. There was no difference in pain outcomes with regard to sequencing of EBRT and VA. LIMITATIONS: One of the limitations of our analysis is that it did not evaluate the effect of pain improvement or resolution before and after EBRT alone and on activities of daily living in the majority of patients. However, one of the main goals of this analysis is to address previous limitations. We attempt to standardize outcome measures by using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). CONCLUSION: A multimodality approach for the management of MCFs includes VA procedures. The majority of patients with MCFs have excellent palliation with this approach. In patients who receive both EBRT and VA, the sequence in which they are given does not affect pain improvement outcomes.

The safety and effectiveness of a curved needle for vertebral augmentation: comparison with traditional techniques.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a curved needle compared with traditional (noncurved needle) techniques in a large single-center experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of 243 consecutive vertebral augmentation procedures over a 17-month period. Curved needle procedures were compared with noncurved needle procedures for baseline clinical variables, complication rate, pain relief, and improvement in disability. Procedure duration and fluoroscopy time were compared between the two cohorts. RESULTS: Between curved needle and noncurved needle procedures, there were no statistically significant differences in the baseline clinical variables, fracture location, and fracture etiology. No complications were noted in either group. In both groups, there was a median improvement in the visual analog scale (VAS) score of 2.0 points (P = .62). More than 90% of procedures in both groups resulted in some pain improvement (P = .78). For both groups, the median improvement in disability on the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) was 4.0 points (P = .69). Approximately 70% of procedures in both groups resulted in improvement in disability (P = 1.00). In single-level cases, there were shorter procedure times (51.8 min ± 2.7 vs 62.8 min ± 2.2, P = .002) and shorter fluoroscopy times (P = .31) for curved needle procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The curved needle is as safe and effective as traditional vertebral augmentation techniques in treating the pain and disability related to vertebral compression fractures. Additionally, the curved needle is associated with shorter procedure duration and reduced fluoroscopy time.