Hidden Dangers of Frailty: Higher Mortality, Complications and Costs in Acute Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a clinically recognizable state of increased vulnerability due to age-related decline in reserve and function across multiple physiologic systems that compromises the ability to cope with acute stress. As frailty is being identified as an important risk factor in outcomes of gastrointestinal pathologies, we aimed to assess outcomes in patients with acute pancreatitis within this cohort. METHOD: We conducted a retrospective study using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. ICD-10 codes were used to inquire for patients admitted with acute pancreatitis between September 2015 through 2017. ICD-10 codes corresponding to the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) were used to divide the study sample into 2 cohorts: low risk (< 5 points) and intermediate or high risk (> 5 points). To calculate the points, we fitted a logistic regression model that included membership of the frail group as the binary dependent variable (frail vs. non-frail) and the set of ICD-10 codes as binary predictor variables (1 = present, 0 = absent for each code). To simplify the calculation and interpretation, we multiplied regression coefficients by five to create a points system, so that a certain number of points are awarded for each ICD-10 code and added together to create the final frailty risk score. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to find adjusted mortality. RESULTS: Out of a total of 1,267,744 patients admitted with acute pancreatitis, 728,953 (57.5%) were identified as intermediate and high risk (> 5 points) (study cohort) and 538,781 (42.5%) as low risk (< 5 points). The mean age in the study cohort was 64.8 ± 12.6 and that in the low-risk group was 58.6 ± 9.5. Most of the patients in both groups were males and Caucasians; Medicare was the predominant insurance provider. A majority of the admissions in both groups were in an urban teaching hospital and were emergency. (Table 1). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality which was significantly higher in the study cohort as compared to the low-risk group (4.3% vs. 2.5%, p < 0.0001). The age-adjusted Odds ratio of mortality was 1.72(95% CI (Confidence Interval) 1.65-1.80, p < 0.05). When compared between the two groups; median length of stay (6 vs. 4); hospitalization cost ($14,412 vs. $10,193), disposition to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) (17.1% vs. 8.6%) and need for home health care (HHC) was significantly higher in the study cohort. Complications like septicemia, septic shock, and acute kidney injury were also higher in the study group (Table 2). Table 1 Baseline demographics of the cohort Characteristics Acute pancreatitis with High HES Frailty score (> 5, intermediate + high) Acute pancreatitis with low HES Frailty score (< 5) P-value N = 1,267,744 N = 728,953 (57.5%) N = 538,781 (42.5%) Age  Mean years (Mean ± SD) 64.8 ± 12.6 58.6 ± 9.5 < 0.001 Gender < 0.001  Male 59.1% 52.3%  Female 40.9% 47.7% *Missing-475 Age groups < 0.001  18-44 3.7% 14.3%  45-64 48% 52.9%  65-84 32.2% 28.7%  ≥ 85 16.1% 4.1% Race < 0.001  Caucasians 67.4% 61.9%  African Americans 9.6% 16.8%  Others 23% 21.3% *Missing-10 Insurance type < 0.001  Medicare 40.9% 36.3%  Medicaid 17.2% 24.3%  Private 31.8% 27.9%  Other 9.9% 11.4% *Missing-75 Active smoking 32.7% 37.9% 0.005 Biliary Stone 36.2% 16.7% < 0.001 Admission Type < 0.001  Emergent 93.7% 94.3%  Elective 6.3% 5.7% *Missing-2880 Hospital ownership/control < 0.001  Rural 7.8% 10%  Urban nonteaching 26.3% 26.6%  Urban teaching 65.9% 63.4% Table 2 Outcomes Outcomes Acute pancreatitis with High HES Frailty score (> 5, intermediate + high) Acute pancreatitis with low HES Frailty score (< 5) P-value In-hospital mortality *Missing-920 4.3% 2.5% < .0001 1.72(1.65-1.80) < .0001 Length of stay, days (Median,IQR) 6(3-8) 4(2-6) < .0001 Total hospitalization cost, $ (Median,IQR) 14,412(8843-20,216) 10,193(6840-13,842) < .0001 In-Hospital Complications  ARDS 0.4% 0.3% 0.08  Ventilator dependence respiratory failure 0.23% 0.29% 0.25  Septicemia 15.2% 9.6% < .0001  Septic Shock 6.1% 2.9% < .0001  AKI 24.8% 14.9% < .0001 Disposition < .0001  Discharge to home 58.9% 74.9%  Transfer other: includes  Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF), Intermediate Care Facility (ICF), and another type of facility 17.1% 8.6%  Home health care 11.5% 8.1%  Against medical advice (AMA) 1.6% 3.4% *Missing-920 CONCLUSION: Using frailty as a construct to identify those who are at greater risk for adverse outcomes, can help formulate interventions to target individualized reversible factors to improve outcomes in patients with acute pancreatitis. Future large-scale prospective studies are warranted to understand the dynamic and longitudinal relationship between pancreatitis and frailty.

Cost-effectiveness of endoscopic, surgical and pharmacological obesity therapies: a microsimulation and threshold analyses.

OBJECTIVE: Weight loss interventions to treat obesity include sleeve gastrectomy (SG), lifestyle intervention (LI), endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) and semaglutide. We aimed to identify which treatments are cost-effective and identify requirements for semaglutide to be cost-effective. DESIGN: We developed a semi-Markov microsimulation model to compare the effectiveness of SG, ESG, semaglutide and LI for weight loss in 40 years old with class I/II/III obesity. Extensive one-way sensitivity and threshold analysis were performed to vary cost of treatment strategies and semaglutide adherence rate. Outcome measures were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), with a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$100 000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: When strategies were compared with each other, ESG was cost-effective in class I obesity (US$4105/QALY). SG was cost-effective in class II obesity (US$5883/QALY) and class III obesity (US$7821/QALY). In class I/II/III, obesity, SG and ESG were cost-effective compared with LI. However, semaglutide was not cost-effective compared with LI for class I/II/III obesity (ICER US$508 414/QALY, US$420 483/QALY and US$350 637/QALY). For semaglutide to be cost-effective compared with LI, it would have to cost less than US$7462 (class III), US$5847 (class II) or US$5149 (class I) annually. For semaglutide to be cost-effective when compared with ESG, it would have to cost less than US$1879 (class III), US$1204 (class II) or US$297 (class I) annually. CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effective strategies were: ESG for class I obesity and SG for class II/III obesity. Semaglutide may be cost-effective with substantial cost reduction. Given potentially higher utilisation rates with pharmacotherapy, semaglutide may provide the largest reduction in obesity-related mortality.

Esophageal Neuroendocrine Carcinoma Presenting After Definitive Chemoradiation of Squamous Cell Carcinoma in the Same Location.

Esophageal neuroendocrine carcinoma is very rare and highly aggressive. An 85-year-old man with a history of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in remission presented 4 years after definitive chemoradiation with new-onset dysphagia. Endoscopy with biopsy revealed high-grade malignancy consistent with neuroendocrine carcinoma. Treatment options were limited to chemotherapy because of his metastatic disease, and he unfortunately died 14 months after diagnosis. The occurrence of esophageal neuroendocrine carcinoma in a site of prior squamous cell carcinoma is very uncommon, and this likely represents a case of radiation-induced malignancy. Therefore, when undergoing radiotherapy, patients and providers should discuss the possibility of this life-threatening complication.

An Evaluation of Critical Factors for the Cost-Effectiveness of Real-Time Computer-Aided Detection: Sensitivity and Threshold Analyses Using a Microsimulation Model.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The use of computer-aided detection (CAD) increases the adenoma detection rates (ADRs) during colorectal cancer (CRC) screening/surveillance. This study aimed to evaluate the requirements for CAD to be cost-effective and the impact of CAD on adenoma detection by endoscopists with different ADRs. METHODS: We developed a semi-Markov microsimulation model to compare the effectiveness of traditional colonoscopy (mean ADR, 26%) to colonoscopy with CAD (mean ADR, 37%). CAD was modeled as having a $75 per-procedure cost. Extensive 1-way sensitivity and threshold analysis were performed to vary cost and ADR of CAD. Multiple scenarios evaluated the potential effect of CAD on endoscopists' ADRs. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life year. RESULTS: When modeling CAD improved ADR for all endoscopists, the CAD cohort had 79 and 34 fewer lifetime CRC cases and deaths, respectively, per 10,000 persons. This scenario was dominant with a cost savings of $143 and incremental effectiveness of 0.01 quality-adjusted life years. Threshold analysis demonstrated that CAD would be cost-effective up to an additional cost of $579 per colonoscopy, or if it increases ADR from 26% to at least 30%. CAD reduced CRC incidence and mortality when limited to improving ADRs for low-ADR endoscopists (ADR <25%), with 67 fewer CRC cases and 28 CRC deaths per 10,000 persons compared with traditional colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: As CAD is implemented clinically, it needs to improve mean ADR from 26% to at least 30% or cost less than $579 per colonoscopy to be cost-effective when compared with traditional colonoscopy. Further studies are needed to understand the impact of CAD when used in community practice.

Fully Covered Self-expanding Stents are Cost-effective at Remediating Biliary Strictures in Patients With Chronic Pancreatitis.

Benign biliary strictures (BBS) develop in up to 10% to 30% of patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP).1 Endoscopic endoprosthetics via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has become the standard of care for remediating these strictures. Seventy percent to eighty percent of these strictures resolve with sequential or concurrent placement of multiple plastic stents (MPS).1,2 More recently, placement of fully covered self-expanding metal stents (FCSEMS) have been shown to have similar outcomes as MPS.3-6 FCSEMS provide a larger radial diameter and require fewer procedures, but may have drawbacks, including a higher risk of migration, cholecystitis, delamination, and tissue ingrowth. A recent study demonstrated that FCSEMS with a 12-month indwell had similar outcomes to MPS with fewer ERCP needed.7 However, the cost-effectiveness of either strategy for managing BBS has not been assessed previously nor has the impact of additional reimbursement to cover the cost of FCSEMS on the cost-effectiveness of FCSEMS utilization.

Cost-effectiveness of second-line axicabtagene ciloleucel in relapsed refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

The ZUMA-7 (Efficacy of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel Compared to Standard of Care Therapy in Subjects With Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma) study showed that axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) improved event-free survival (EFS) compared with standard of care (SOC) salvage chemoimmunotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant in primary refractory/early relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL); this led to its recent US Food and Drug Administration approval in this setting. We modeled a hypothetical cohort of US adults (mean age, 65 years) with primary refractory/early relapsed DLBCL by developing a Markov model (lifetime horizon) to model the cost-effectiveness of second-line axi-cel compared with SOC using a range of plausible long-term outcomes. EFS and OS were estimated from ZUMA-7. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Assuming a 5-year EFS of 35% with second-line axi-cel and 10% with SOC, axi-cel was cost-effective at a WTP of $150 000 per QALY ($93 547 per QALY). axi-cel was no longer cost-effective if its 5-year EFS was ≤26.4% or if it cost more than $972 061 at a WTP of $150 000. Second-line axi-cel was the cost-effective strategy in 73% of the 10 000 Monte Carlo iterations at a WTP of $150 000. If the absolute benefit in EFS is maintained over time, second-line axi-cel for aggressive relapsed/refractory DLBCL is cost-effective compared with SOC at a WTP of $150 000 per QALY. However, its cost-effectiveness is highly dependent on long-term outcomes. Routine use of second-line chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy would add significantly to health care expenditures in the United States (more than $1 billion each year), even when used in a high-risk subpopulation. Further reductions in the cost of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy are needed to be affordable in many regions of the world.

Cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin combined with chemoimmunotherapy in untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

In patients with treatment-naive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the POLARIX study (A Study Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Polatuzumab Vedotin With Rituximab-Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, and Prednisone [R-CHP] Versus Rituximab-Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone [R-CHOP] in Participants With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma) reported a 6.5% improvement in the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS), with no difference in overall survival (OS) or safety using polatuzumab vedotin, rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (pola-R-CHP) compared with standard rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of pola-R-CHP for DLBCL. We modeled a hypothetical cohort of US adults (mean age, 65 years) with treatment-naive DLBCL by developing a Markov model (lifetime horizon) to model the cost-effectiveness of pola-R-CHP and R-CHOP using a range of plausible long-term outcomes. Progression rates and OS were estimated from POLARIX. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Assuming a 5-year PFS of 69.6% with pola-R-CHP and 62.7% with R-CHOP, pola-R-CHP was cost-effective at a WTP of $150 000 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $84 308/QALY). pola-R-CHP was no longer cost-effective if its 5-year PFS was 66.1% or lower. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that pola-R-CHP is cost-effective up to a cost of $276 312 at a WTP of $150 000. pola-R-CHP was the cost-effective strategy in 56.6% of the 10 000 Monte Carlo iterations at a WTP of $150 000. If the absolute benefit in PFS is maintained over time, pola-R-CHP is cost-effective compared with R-CHOP at a WTP of $150 000/QALY. However, its cost-effectiveness is highly dependent on its long-term outcomes and costs of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy. Routine usage of pola-R-CHP would add significantly to health care expenditures. Price reductions or identification of subgroups that have maximal benefit would improve cost-effectiveness.

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.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis Prophylaxis in the United States.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common adverse event after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and is responsible for substantial morbidity and health care expenditures of at least $200 million. Therapies for PEP prevention include pancreatic stent placement (PSP), rectal indomethacin, sublingual nitrates, and aggressive lactated Ringer's hydration. Our objective was to determine which PEP prophylactic strategies are cost effective. METHODS: We developed 2 separate decision trees to evaluate PEP prophylactic strategies. The first, in high-risk patients, compared rectal indomethacin, PSP, PSP with indomethacin, sublingual nitrates, aggressive hydration with lactated Ringer's, and no prophylaxis. The second, in average-risk patients, compared rectal indomethacin, sublingual nitrates, aggressive hydration, and no prophylaxis. We used incidence rates, transition probabilities, and costs from publications and public data sources. Outcome measures were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULTS: Compared with no prophylaxis, all strategies were cost effective at a WTP of $100,000 in preventing PEP in high-risk patients. When directly compared with each other, rectal indomethacin was the cost-effective strategy in high-risk patients ($31,589/QALYs). In average-risk patients, indomethacin and sublingual nitrates were cost effective at a WTP of $100,000/QALYs compared with no prophylaxis. When directly compared with each other, rectal indomethacin was the cost-effective strategy ($53,016/QALYs). CONCLUSIONS: Rectal indomethacin was the cost-effective strategy for preventing PEP in both average-risk and high-risk patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. All strategies were cost effective when compared with no prophylaxis in high-risk patients, whereas all strategies except for aggressive hydration with lactated Ringer's were cost effective in average-risk patients. Further studies are needed to improve the utilization of PEP prevention strategies.

Comparison of the impact of chronic corticosteroid therapy on critical care outcomes of COVID-19 patients with and without history of chronic liver disease.

There is a paucity of studies investigating the impact of chronic corticosteroid use for coexisting conditions in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Additionally, the information regarding the impact of chronic liver disease (CLD) on COVID-19 outcomes is evolving. Our study aims to investigate hospitalization outcomes of patients with COVID-19 on long term corticosteroids for coexisting conditions while also seeking to compare outcomes between such patients with a history of CLD to analyze the impact on mortality. We conducted a retrospective chart review across our 10-hospital network identifying patients on chronic corticosteroids (Prednisone ≥ 5 mg daily dose or equivalent dose of another steroid, for a duration of 30 days or more) who were hospitalized with COVID-19 from March 1, 2020 to June 30, 2020. Of these patients who met inclusion criteria, patients were then divided into groups based upon their history of CLD. Primary outcomes of the study looked to investigate the hospitalization outcomes of patients with a history of CLD and comorbid conditions requiring chronic corticosteroid use. Secondary outcomes sought to further investigate risk factors for mortality in our study sample. 837 charts were reviewed. 139 patients met inclusion criteria of which 34 patients had a history of CLD. Statistical analysis demonstrated no difference in length of hospital stay but increased ICU admission rate in the CLD group (41.2% vs 23.8%). No statistically significant difference was seen in between the CLD and non-CLD groups in term of complication rates and 28-day mortality. However, chronic corticosteroids patients were found to have higher rates of ICU admission and overall 28-day and ICU mortality in comparison to patients who were not on chronic corticosteroids prior to COVID-19 hospitalization. The larger contributor to COVID-19 severity was likely chronic corticosteroid use rather than CLD and thus chronic corticosteroid use should be limited throughout the COVID-19 pandemic especially in patients with additional speculated risk factors for COVID-19 such as CLD.

Threshold Analysis of the Cost-effectiveness of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Patients at High Risk for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Data from the International Cancer of the Pancreas Screening Consortium studies have demonstrated that screening for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma can be effective and that surveillance improves survival in high-risk individuals. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and cross-sectional imaging are both used, although there is some suggestion that EUS is superior. Demonstration of the cost-effectiveness of screening is important to implement screening in high-risk groups. METHODS: Results from centers with EUS-predominant screening were pooled to evaluate efficacy of index EUS in screening. A decision analysis model simulated the outcome of high-risk patients who undergo screening and evaluated the parameters that would make screening cost-effective at a US $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year willingness to pay. RESULTS: One-time index EUS has a sensitivity of 71.25% and specificity of 99.82% to detection to detect high-risk lesions. Screening with index EUS was cost-effective, particularly at lifetime pancreatic cancer probabilities of greater than 10.8%, or at lower probabilities if life expectancy after resection of a lesion that was at least 16 years, and if missed, lesion rates on index EUS are 5% or less. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic cancer screening can be cost-effective through index EUS, particularly for those individuals at high-lifetime risk of cancer.

Colonic diverticular disease in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: is there really an association? A nationwide analysis.

PURPOSE: Colonic diverticulosis, diverticulitis, and diverticular bleeding are reportedly more common in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD). Other studies have questioned this association. The objectives of our study are to clarify this association using a larger patient population and to identify risk factors in general to develop diverticular disease. METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample weighted discharges from 2003 to 2011 were used to assess for the prevalence of diverticular disease in the population with ADPKD compared with the general population without ADPKD. A multivariable direct logistic regression model was constructed to determine independent predictors of diverticular disease in the general population. RESULTS: The prevalence of diverticulosis, diverticulitis, and diverticular bleeding were considerably increased in patients with ADPKD compared with the general population without ADPKD. The prevalence of colonic surgery was less in ADPKD patients with diverticulitis. In patients with kidney transplant, the prevalence of diverticulitis was increased in the ADPKD group, but colonic surgery was not significantly different between both groups. The prevalence of diverticular bleeding was slightly elevated in patients with ADPKD, but colonic surgery was significantly increased in patients with ADPKD. NSAID use, hypertension, constipation, and ADPKD had increased odds ratios for diverticular disease during multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: There is an increased prevalence of colonic diverticular disease in the population with ADPKD.

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.

Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Over the past 2 decades, biological therapy with monoclonal antibodies targeting tumor necrosis factor-α has become a cornerstone of treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Although clinically effective, the biological therapies remain expensive, and their availability and utilization have been at times limited due to their high costs. Biosimilars are biological products similar to but not identical to the original biological agent or "reference biologic," also called "originator biologic." It is hoped that the use of biosimilars might enable these agents to become more available and, thus, decrease further expenditures related to the use of the original reference agents such as infliximab and adalimumab. In this study, we review the currently available evidence and shortcomings of these data supporting the use of biosimilars for the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease, including their efficacy and safety as related to initiating therapy with biosimilar agents or switching between reference and biosimilar biologic agents.

Quality improvement initiative increases total paracentesis and early paracentesis rates in hospitalised cirrhotics with ascites.

OBJECTIVE: Early paracentesis (EP) for rapid diagnosis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is considered best practice in the care of admitted patients with cirrhosis and ascites, but inpatient paracentesis is frequently not performed or delayed. We developed a quality improvement (QI) initiative aimed at increasing the proportion of admitted patients with cirrhosis who undergo paracentesis and EP. DESIGN: Pre-post study of a QI initiative. SETTING: A tertiary care hospital in a major metropolitan area. PATIENTS: Hospitalised patients with cirrhosis and ascites. INTERVENTIONS: We targeted care providers in the emergency department (ED) by raising awareness of the importance of EP, developing criteria to identify patients at highest risk of SBP who were prioritised for EP by ED providers and restructuring the ED environment to enable timely paracentesis. RESULTS: 76 patients meeting inclusion criteria were admitted during the postintervention 9-month study period. Of these, 91% (69/76) underwent paracentesis during admission versus 71 % (77/109) preintervention (p=0.001). 81% (56/69) underwent EP within 12 hours of presentation or after a predefined acceptable reason for delay versus 48% (37/77) preintervention (p=0.001). There were no significant differences in in-hospital mortality or length of stay before and after intervention. CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary QI intervention targeting care in the ED successfully increased the proportion of patients with cirrhosis and ascites undergoing diagnostic paracentesis during admission and EP within 12 hours of presentation.

Risk of Early Colorectal Cancers Needs to Be Considered in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Care.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend starting colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance 8-10 years after inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) onset. Recent studies report that the incidence of CRC within 8-10 years of IBD onset (i.e., early CRC) ranges from 12 to 42%. AIMS: To describe the current prevalence of early CRC in a tertiary care center IBD cohort with CRC and to identify associated risk factors. METHODS: We performed a single-center observational study of IBD patients diagnosed with CRC from 2005 to 2015. We compared characteristics of patients with early CRC (diagnosis of CRC within 8 years of initial IBD onset) to those with CRC diagnosed later in their IBD course. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients met inclusion criteria. Eleven (11.8%) patients developed CRC within 8 years of initial IBD onset. On multivariable logistic regression, age greater than 28 at IBD onset (adjusted OR 12.0; 95% CI 2.30, 62.75) and tobacco use (adjusted OR 8.52; 95% CI 1.38, 52.82) were significant predictors of early CRC. A validation cohort confirmed calibration and discrimination of the model. CONCLUSIONS: One out of every eight IBD patients with CRC developed their malignancy prior to the currently recommended timeframe for the initiation of surveillance colonoscopy. IBD onset at 28 years or older and tobacco use were identified as predictors of early CRC. Early CRC should be considered in discussions of cancer surveillance in this population. Prospective cohort studies are necessary to further analyze the impact of early CRC in IBD.