Moving beyond Symptom Criteria to Diagnose and Treat Functional Disorders: Patient-Reported Symptoms of Functional Lower Gastrointestinal Disorders Correlate Poorly with Objective Assessment of Luminal Contents Seen on Intestinal Ultrasound.

Background/Objectives: The diagnosis of lower functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) is currently based on subjective and unreliable patient-reported symptoms, with significant clinical overlap between diagnosed phenotypes. Objective biomarkers are urgently sought. Gastrointestinal ultrasound (GIUS) can objectively and non-invasively assess luminal contents. This study aimed to assess the utility of GIUS in phenotyping patients with lower FGIDs. Methods: Patients with lower FGIDs underwent a GIUS and completed the Rome IV Diagnostic Questionnaire, SAGIS questionnaire, and 100 mm VAS score for overall symptom severity. The faecal loading score (FLS) was obtained using a modified Leech score, where an FLS of >37 was consistent with clinically significant constipation. Results: Eighty-eight patients fulfilled the study requirements. In total, 56 met the Rome IV criteria for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) subtypes, while 23 met the criteria for functional constipation (FC), 4 for functional diarrhoea (FD), and 5 for other diagnoses. Patients reporting constipation-predominant symptoms had a significantly higher median FLS than those describing diarrhoea-predominant symptoms (FLS = 40 [IQR 20.0-53.3] vs. 13.3 [IQR 6.7-40.0], respectively). However, 27% of patients describing diarrhoea had significant faecal loading on GIUS, and of those who described constipation, 34% did not have significant faecal loading. Sensitivity and specificity for the detection of FLS-indicated constipation by the Rome IV criteria were low at 59% and 66%, respectively. Conclusions: The symptom-based diagnosis of FGID subtypes based on the Rome IV criteria is a poor predictor of faecal loading. These findings should prompt further exploration of the limitations of symptom-based assessment and a shift towards physiological assessment of patients with FGIDs such as gastrointestinal ultrasound to develop more targeted therapy. Future research is underway to determine if targeting objective physiological endpoints results in improved clinical outcomes.

Clinical utility of C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio in the management of patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

Background and Aim: C-reactive protein (CRP)-to-albumin ratio (CAR) is a novel score with prognostic value in inflammatory conditions. This study assessed the performance of CAR as an objective marker of disease activity and prediction of subtherapeutic infliximab trough levels in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on three different patient cohorts with IBD: patients who had (i) fecal calprotectin (FC) measurements; (ii) Mayo Endoscopic Scores; and (iii) infliximab trough levels available. The relative performances of CAR, albumin, and CRP were compared in predicting disease activity (based on FC or Mayo Endoscopic Score) and infliximab trough levels. Results: In both the FC (n = 289) and endoscopy (n = 65) cohorts, albumin and CAR correlated with objective disease activity. CAR (area under the curve [AUC] 0.70) was only marginally better at detecting active disease, measured by FC, compared to CRP (AUC 0.68). A CAR >0.15 was able to detect Mayo 3 disease (AUC 0.83, sensitivity 81%, specificity 89%). Albumin (r = 0.38) and CAR (r = -0.42) correlated with infliximab trough levels (n = 204). The optimal CAR for detecting subtherapeutic infliximab trough levels was >0.08 (AUC 0.70, sensitivity 66%, specificity 64%). Both albumin and CAR were independent predictors of subtherapeutic infliximab trough levels but correlated poorly with infliximab trough levels longitudinally in the same patient. Conclusion: CAR was only a modest discriminator of subtherapeutic infliximab levels and offers little more than CRP in detecting active disease. CAR has potential to detect severe Mayo 3 disease and could be calculated in patients admitted with suspected acute severe ulcerative colitis.

Importance of Retaining Sufficient Acetabular Depth: Successful 2-Year Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy for Patients With Pincer Morphology as Compared With Matched Controls.

BACKGROUND: Patients with pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement are commonly treated with arthroscopic reduction of acetabular depth as measured by the lateral center-edge angle (LCEA). The optimal amount of rim reduction has not been established, although large resections may increase contact pressures through the hip. A recent publication demonstrated inferior surgical outcomes in patients with acetabular overcoverage as compared with normal acetabular coverage. Casual observation of our database suggested equivalent improvements, prompting a similar analysis. PURPOSE: To analyze patient-reported outcomes after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement in patients with acetabular overcoverage who were matched with controls with normal coverage, as well as to analyze associations with reduction in LCEA. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up after receiving hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement by a single surgeon. Cases were reviewed to identify those with pincer-type morphology (LCEA >40°) and matched according to sex, age, chondral damage, and surgery date in a 1:1 ratio with controls with an LCEA of 25° to 40°. The surgical goal was to reduce the LCEA to the upper end of the normal range with minimal rim resection, usually 35° to 37°. Radiographic measurements of coverage, intraoperative findings, procedures, and patient-reported outcomes were recorded, including the 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool, Non-arthritic Hip Score, Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, visual analog scale for pain, rates of revision or reoperation, and conversion to total hip arthroplasty. RESULTS: A total of 114 hips (93 patients) for the pincer group were matched 1:1 from 616 hips (541 patients) for the control group. The pincer group (mean ± SD age, 34.5 ± 12.2 years) did not differ in age, body mass index, or follow-up from controls. LCEA was reduced in both groups pre- to postoperatively: the pincer group from 44.0° ± 2.8° to 34.2° ± 3.5° and the controls from 32.9° ± 3.9° to 31.0° ± 3.0°. No differences in improvement were observed: iHOT-12 improved by 35.7 points in both groups (P = .9 for analysis of variance interaction) and Nonarthritic Hip Score by 22.3 points (P = .6). From all eligible surgical procedures, 2-year follow up rates were 2.5% and 2.6% for the pincer and control cohorts, respectively, and 1.2% and 0.3% for conversion to total hip arthroplasty. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic management of acetabular overcoverage can achieve excellent results, equivalent to arthroscopy for other causes of symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement. A key finding was smaller rim resections producing a mean postoperative LCEA of 34.2° with a small standard deviation.

Worth living or worth dying? The views of the general public about allowing disabled children to die.

BACKGROUND: Decisions about withdrawal of life support for infants have given rise to legal battles between physicians and parents creating intense media attention. It is unclear how we should evaluate when life is no longer worth living for an infant. Public attitudes towards treatment withdrawal and the role of parents in situations of disagreement have not previously been assessed. METHODS: An online survey was conducted with a sample of the UK public to assess public views about the benefit of life in hypothetical cases similar to real cases heard by the UK courts (eg, Charlie Gard, Alfie Evans). We then evaluated these public views in comparison with existing ethical frameworks for decision-making. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty participants completed the survey. The majority (94%) agreed that an infant's life may have no benefit when well-being falls below a critical level. Decisions to withdraw treatment were positively associated with the importance of use of medical resources, the infant's ability to have emotional relationships, and mental abilities. Up to 50% of participants in each case believed it was permissible to either continue or withdraw treatment. CONCLUSION: Despite the controversy, our findings indicate that in the most severe cases, most people agree that life is not worth living for a profoundly disabled infant. Our survey found wide acceptance of at least the permissibility of withdrawal of treatment across a range of cases, though also a reluctance to overrule parents' decisions. These findings may be useful when constructing guidelines for clinical practice.