The Rolling Stone: Bouveret Syndrome Requiring Open Gastrotomy After Failing Electrohydraulic Lithotripsy.

Bouveret syndrome (BS) is an extremely rare form of gallstone ileus where a stone travels through a biliary-enteric fistula and causes gastric outlet obstruction. A 92-year-old male presented with gastric outlet obstruction secondary to an impacted gallstone in the duodenal bulb seen on imaging. Endoscopic therapy failed twice due to the immense gallstone size, and an open gastrotomy was required to remove the stone. The procedure was successful; however, the patient, unfortunately, passed away days after the operation due to other hospital illnesses. BS should be considered in patients with advanced age and significant comorbidities presenting with gastric outlet obstruction.

Proton pump inhibitor therapy usage and associated hospitalization rates and critical care outcomes of COVID-19 patients.

Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPI) are one of the most prescribed medications in the United States. However, PPIs have been shown to increase the risk of enteric infections. Our study aims to evaluate the correlation between PPI and COVID-19 severity. We performed a retrospective cohort study on patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from March to August 2020. Patients were categorized based on PPI user status. Primary outcomes included need for hospital or ICU admission and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes looked to determine the severity of COVID-19 infection and effect of comorbid conditions. 2,594 patients were reviewed. The primary outcomes of our study found that neither active nor past PPI use was associated with increased hospital admission or 30-day mortality following completion of multivariate analysis. Additionally, there was no association between COVID-19 infection and the strength of PPI dosing (low, standard, high). However, the following covariates were independently and significantly associated with increased admission: age, male gender, diabetes, COPD, composite cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, and obesity. The following covariates were associated with increased mortality: age, male gender, COPD, and kidney disease. In conclusion, the high risk features and comorbidities of PPI users were found to have a stronger correlation to severe COVID-19 infection and poor outcomes as opposed to the use of PPI therapy.

Effect of Using Personal Protective Equipment during the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Quality Indicators of Screening Colonoscopies.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected many facets of the practice of medicine including screening colonoscopies. AIMS: Our study looks to observe if there has been an effect on the quality of colonoscopies, as indicated by quality measures such as the cecal intubation rate (CIR), cecal intubation time (CIT), scope withdrawal time (SWT), and adenoma detection rate (ADR) with the adoption of standard COVID-19 precautions. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review to analyze the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on screening colonoscopies. The study utilized data on CIR, CIT, SWT, and ADR from outpatient, nonemergent procedures conducted at 3 endoscopy suites of St. Luke's University Health Network. All inpatient and emergent procedures were excluded. RESULTS: Our study demonstrated that the total number of screening colonoscopies was decreased between 2019 and 2020 (318 in 2019 vs. 157 in 2020, p = 0.005). CIT (320 ± 105 seconds in 2019 vs. 392 ± 107 seconds in 2020, p = 0.001) and SWT (706 ± 232 seconds in 2019 vs. 830 ± 241 seconds in 2020, p = 0.001) were increased while CIR (98.2% in 2019 vs. 96.6% in 2020, p = 0.04) was decreased between 2019 and 2020 likely due to PPE introduction. ADR was similar between the two groups (38.23 (12.50-66.66) in 2019 vs. 38.18 (16.66-66.00) in 2020, p = 0.8). CONCLUSION: Our study showed that quality indices for screening colonoscopies like CIR, CIT, and SWT were negatively impacted during the COVID-19 time period. ADR, however, was similar. Thus, the efficiency of the procedures was affected by the use of PPE but it did not affect the colonoscopy's clinical benefit.

P065 A One-Time Education for Gastroenterologists Regarding Osteoporosis Screening for IBD Patients Improves Provider Knowledge But Not Screening Rates.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is a chronic gastrointestinal inflammatory condition and has been increasing in prevalence in the United States, with a 30-40% increase over the past few decades. Osteoporosis can be seen in up to 40% of IBD patients. Screening for osteoporosis in IBD patients involves the use of DEXA scans and is recommended by the IBD Cornerstone Committee for select patients, including steroid use > 3 months consecutively or a total of 1 year in the past 2 years, family history of osteoporosis, malnutrition, amenorrheic or post-menopausal. Our quality improvement study looked to improve osteoporosis screening among gastroenterologists. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review on all IBD patients within the St. Luke's Network and extrapolated data on age (>50 in male and >65 in female), sex, chronic glucocorticoid use (3 month consecutively or cumulative), osteoporosis/osteopenia diagnosis, vitamin D (vit-D) levels, and DEXA scan between 2019 to 2021. We gave a 5-minute presentation on current DEXA screen recommendations for patients with IBD on 5/27/2021 to all the network's gastroenterologists, which totaled 12. We performed a pre and post education survey consisting of 5 questions on provider knowledge and comfortability with osteoporosis screening. We assessed provider knowledge, as well as rates of osteoporosis screening. All statistical analyses were conducted in IBM SPSS for Windows Version 26. Chi Square tests were used to compare two groups in categorical variables while Mann-Whitney tests were done to compare continuous variables like age and vit-D levels. RESULTS: There were a total of 5442 patients; 3927 patients before the educational intervention on 5/27/2021 and 1515 patients after the intervention. Both pre and post intervention groups were balanced in terms of age, gender, smoking status, and alcohol risk. Percent of DEXA scans were similar between both groups (13.0% vs 12.3%, p=0.5). DEXA screening rates among patients with chronic steroid use pre-intervention vs post-intervention was 44.45 vs 42.4% respectively. Vit-D levels compared between both groups was not statistically significant (30.5 vs 31.8, p=0.1). Surveys conducted before and after the intervention showed an overall increase in percentage of agreement responses about knowledge and confidence in DEXA screening (88.5% vs 97.5%). CONCLUSION: DEXA scanning can help detect premature decrease in bone mineral density and provide physicians with the opportunity to prevent further morbidity. Our study showed no difference in DEXA screening rates before and after intervention. However, there was an increase in provider knowledge based on post-intervention surveys. A similar study showed that it took three interventions, including educational presentation, flyers, and on screen EMR reminders for there to be a sustainable improvement in the rate of DEXA screening. Our project may have required additional interventions to produce an effect and thus reinforces the need for further efforts to improve osteoporosis screening in IBD patients.