The impact of impulsivity on weight loss after bariatric surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Impulsivity has been shown to be associated with obesity through links to pathological eating behavior such as binge eating. The recent literature suggests that impulsivity is linked to poorer outcomes post-bariatric surgery. Impulsivity can be measured in various ways and comprises of three broad domains: impulsive choice, impulsive action, and impulsive personality traits. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize the current evidence on the impact of impulsivity on post-bariatric surgery weight loss. METHODS: A literature review was performed in February 2020. Original studies investigating the relationship between impulsivity and weight loss post-bariatric surgery were evaluated. RESULTS: Ten studies with a total of 1246 patients were analyzed. There were four case-control, four prospective observational and two retrospective observational studies. The postoperative follow-up ranged from 0.5 to 12 years. Eight studies measuring trait impulsivity did not show any association with weight loss post-bariatric surgery, although two studies reported an indirect effect of impulsivity on weight loss mediated via pathological eating behavior. Assessment of impulsive action by two studies showed that post-bariatric surgery weight loss is affected by impulsive action. CONCLUSION: Impulsivity may adversely affect postoperative outcomes after bariatric surgery. However, this may be specific to state impulsivity or impulsive action rather than trait impulsivity. Patients with a higher state impulsivity may benefit from closer follow-up post-bariatric surgery, as well as cognitive behavioral therapies targeting cognitive control over food. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, systematic review.

Utility of the Health Belief Model in predicting compliance of screening in patients with chronic hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND: Regular surveillance is recommended for patients with chronic hepatitis B, to select candidates for anti-viral therapy and detect early complications. However, factors that determine compliance are not well studied. AIM: To determine the utility of the Health Belief Model in explaining non-compliance, among a group of chronic hepatitis B patients for screening. METHODS: A total of 192 chronic hepatitis B patients who responded to advertisement for free screening took part in a telephonic interview study. Subjects were asked about the five constructs of the Health Belief Model, and factors associated with recent screening were analysed. RESULTS: The mean age of the subjects was 42.1 +/- 0.7 years; 77% white male, and 97% Chinese. About 108 patients (56%) had recent screening. At multivariate analysis, only the ability to remember date of follow-up (OR: 4.37; 95% CI: 2.07-9.17) and the perception of having to wait a long time for venepuncture (OR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.19-0.79) were significantly associated with recent screening. CONCLUSION: Future public health measures should include improving the logistics of follow-up procedures and providing reminders for screening to improve compliance.

Resolution of adefovir-related nephrotoxicity by adefovir dose-reduction in patients with chronic hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND: Chronic hepatitis B patients (CHB) treated with adefovir were followed up to evaluate nephrotoxicity and its outcome. AIM: To assess the incidence of renal dysfunction during adefovir therapy in Asian patients and factors associated with it, and evaluate strategies to improve adefovir-related renal dysfunction and their impact on viral suppression. METHODS: Chronic hepatitis B clinic patients from a tertiary hospital on adefovir treatment, with their clinical and laboratory parameters were extracted from the hospital electronic clinical database in an observational study design. Patients were excluded if they had liver/renal transplant, baseline renal impairment or were on dialysis. Adefovir-related renal dysfunction was defined as adefovir-related abnormal serum creatinine (ARASC) > 125 µmol/L (males), >90 µmol/L (females); adefovir-related abnormal GFR <60 mL/min; and adefovir-related increased serum creatinine >0.5 mg/dL, without other known causes of nephrotoxicity. RESULTS: A total of 271/383 adefovir-treated patients were suitable for analysis and 33(12%) patients developed abnormal serum creatinine. Cumulative increase in proportion of patients with ARASC was 33.8% and GFR ≤60 mL/min was 38.3% by 6 years, while serum creatinine increase ≥0.5 mg/dL was 21.48% by 5 years. Using multivariate analysis, the only independent baseline predictor of ARASC was GFR ≤76.1 mL/min. Patients who had ARASC had similar levels of viral suppression to those who did not have ARASC. Those who had ARASC either continued adefovir (24%), switched therapy (24%) or had adefovir dose reduction (52%). ARASC resolved and GFR normalised in almost all patients after either switching therapy or reducing adefovir dose, with no difference between the two strategies (P = 0.737). Those with adefovir dose reduction had no significant increase in HBV DNA (P = 0.170). CONCLUSIONS: Adefovir-related renal dysfunction occurred in a significant number of adefovir-treated patients, but reduction of the dose led to renal improvement without compromising treatment efficacy.