AGA Clinical Practice Update on Pregnancy-Related Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease: Expert Review.

DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update is to review the available published evidence and expert advice regarding the clinical management of patients with pregnancy-related gastrointestinal and liver disease. METHODS: This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership and underwent internal peer review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee and external peer review through the standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This article provides practical advice for the management of pregnant patients with gastrointestinal and liver disease based on the best available published evidence. The Best Practice Advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and from expert opinion. Because formal systematic reviews were not performed, these Best Practice Advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: To optimize gastrointestinal and liver disease before pregnancy, preconception and contraceptive care counseling by a multidisciplinary team should be encouraged for reproductive-aged persons who desire to become pregnant. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Procedures, medications, and other interventions to optimize maternal health should not be withheld solely because a patient is pregnant and should be individualized after an assessment of the risks and benefits. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Coordination of birth for a pregnant patient with complex inflammatory bowel disease, advanced cirrhosis, or a liver transplant should be managed by a multidisciplinary team, preferably in a tertiary care center. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Early treatment of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy may reduce progression to hyperemesis gravidarum. In addition to standard diet and lifestyle measures, stepwise treatment consists of symptom control with vitamin B6 and doxylamine, hydration, and adequate nutrition; ondansetron, metoclopramide, promethazine, and intravenous glucocorticoids may be required in moderate to severe cases. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Constipation in pregnant persons may result from hormonal, medication-related, and physiological changes. Treatment options include dietary fiber, lactulose, and polyethylene glycol-based laxatives. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Elective endoscopic procedures should be deferred until the postpartum period, whereas nonemergent but necessary procedures should ideally be performed in the second trimester. Pregnant patients with cirrhosis should undergo evaluation for, and treatment of, esophageal varices; upper endoscopy is suggested in the second trimester (if not performed within 1 year before conception) to guide consideration of nonselective ß-blocker therapy or endoscopic variceal ligation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: In patients with inflammatory bowel disease, clinical remission before conception, during pregnancy, and in the postpartum period is essential for improving outcomes of pregnancy. Biologic agents should be continued throughout pregnancy and the postpartum period; use of methotrexate, thalidomide, and ozanimod must be stopped at least 6 months before conception. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography during pregnancy may be performed for urgent indications, such as choledocholithiasis, cholangitis, and some cases of gallstone pancreatitis. Ideally, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography should be performed during the second trimester, but if deferring the procedure may be detrimental to the health of the patient and fetus, a multidisciplinary team should be convened to decide on the advisability of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Cholecystectomy is safe during pregnancy; a laparoscopic approach is the standard of care regardless of trimester, but ideally in the second trimester. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: The diagnosis of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy is based on a serum bile acid level >10 µmol/L in the setting of pruritus, typically during the second or third trimester. Treatment should be offered with oral ursodeoxycholic acid in a total daily dose of 10-15 mg/kg. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Management of liver diseases unique to pregnancy, such as pre-eclampsia; hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelets syndrome; and acute fatty liver of pregnancy requires planning for delivery and timely evaluation for possible liver transplantation. Daily aspirin prophylaxis for patients at risk for pre-eclampsia or hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelets syndrome is advised beginning at week 12 of gestation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: In patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection, serum hepatitis B virus DNA and liver biochemical test levels should be ordered. Patients not on treatment but with a serum hepatitis B virus DNA level >200,000 IU/mL during the third trimester of pregnancy should be considered for treatment with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: In patients on immunosuppressive therapy for chronic liver diseases or after liver transplantation, therapy should be continued at the lowest effective dose during pregnancy. Mycophenolate mofetil should not be administered during pregnancy.

Management of Thrombocytopenia and Coagulopathy in Patients with Chronic Liver Disease Undergoing Therapeutic Endoscopic Interventions.

Management of coagulopathy in patients with advanced liver disease undergoing therapeutic endoscopic procedures is complex. Improvements in the understanding of hemostasis at a physiologic level have highlighted the inaccuracy of currently available clinical tests, like platelet count and prothrombin time, in estimating hemostasis in patients with cirrhosis. With identification of novel factors that contribute to bleeding risk in patients with cirrhosis, there is a dearth of clinical trial data that account for all potentially relevant factors and that examine interventions to reduce bleeding risk. Precise recommendations regarding transfusion strategies based on hemostatic test results in patients with cirrhosis are impractical.

Designing a critical care solution using in-person and telemedicine approaches in the US-Mexico border area during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: UC San Diego Health System (UCSDHS) is the largest academic medical center and integrated care network in US-Mexico border area of California contiguous to the Northern Baja region of Mexico. The COVID-19 pandemic compelled several UCSDHS and local communities to create awareness around best methods to promote regional health in this economically, socially, and politically important border area. PURPOSE: To improve understanding of optimal strategies to execute critical care collaborative programs between academic and community health centers facing public health emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic, based on the experience of UCSDHS and several community hospitals (one US, two Mexican) in the US-Mexico border region. METHODS: After taking several preparatory steps, we developed a two-phase program that included 1) in-person activities to perform needs assessments, hands-on training and education, and morale building and 2) creation of a telemedicine-based (Tele-ICU) service for direct patient management and/or educational coaching experiences.Findings.A clinical and educational program between academic and community border hospitals was feasible, effective, and well received. CONCLUSION: We offer several policy-oriented recommendations steps for academic and community healthcare programs to build educational, collaborative partnerships to address COVID-19 and other cross-cultural, international public health emergencies.

An In-Person and Telemedicine "Hybrid" System to Improve Cross-Border Critical Care in COVID-19.

Background: UC San Diego Health System (UCSDHS) is an academic medical center and integrated care network in the US-Mexico border area of California contiguous to the Mexican Northern Baja region. The COVID-19 pandemic deeply influenced UCSDHS activities as new public health challenges increasingly related to high population density, cross-border traffic, economic disparities, and interconnectedness between cross-border communities, which accelerated development of clinical collaborations between UCSDHS and several border community hospitals - one in the US, two in Mexico - as high volumes of severely ill patients overwhelmed hospitals. Objective: We describe the development, implementation, feasibility, and acceptance of a novel critical care support program in three community hospitals along the US-Mexico border. Methods: We created and instituted a hybrid critical care program involving: 1) in-person activities to perform needs assessments of equipment and supplies and hands-on training and education, and 2) creation of a telemedicine-based (Tele-ICU) service for direct patient management and/or consultative, education-based experiences. We collected performance metrics surrounding adherence to evidence-based practices and staff perceptions of critical care delivery. Findings: In-person intervention phase identified and filled gaps in equipment and supplies, and Tele-ICU program promoted adherence to evidence-based practices and improved staff confidence in caring for critically ill COVID-19 patients at each hospital. Conclusion: A collaborative, hybrid critical care program across academic and community centers is feasible and effective to address cross-cultural public health emergencies.

Medical Undistancing Through Telemedicine: A Model Enabling Rapid Telemedicine Deployment in an Academic Health Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: The authors draw upon their experience with a successful, enterprise-level, telemedicine program implementation to present a "How To" paradigm for other academic health centers that wish to rapidly deploy such a program in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. The advent of social distancing as essential for decreasing viral transmission has made it challenging to provide medical care. Telemedicine has the potential to medically undistance health care providers while maintaining the quality of care delivered and fulfilling the goal of social distancing. Methods: Rather than simply reporting enterprise telemedicine successes, the authors detail key telemedicine elements essential for rapid deployment of both an ambulatory and inpatient telemedicine solution. Such a deployment requires a multifaceted strategy: (1) determining the appropriateness of telemedicine use, (2) understanding the interface with the electronic health record, (3) knowing the equipment and resources needed, (4) developing a rapid rollout plan, (5) establishing a command center for post go-live support, (6) creating and disseminating reference materials and educational guides, (7) training clinicians, patients, and clinic schedulers, (8) considering billing and credentialing implications, (9) building a robust communications strategy, and (10) measuring key outcomes. Results: Initial results are reported, showing a telemedicine rate increase to 45.8% (58.6% video and telephone) in just the first week of rollout. Over a 5-month period, the enterprise has since conducted over 119,500 ambulatory telemedicine evaluations (a 1,000-fold rate increase from the pre-COVID-19 time period). Conclusion: This article is designed to offer a "How To" potential best practice approach for others wishing to quickly implement a telemedicine program during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Path to Clinical Quality Integration Through a Clinically Integrated Network: The Experience of an Academic Health System and Its Community Affiliates.

INTRODUCTION: Academic medical centers (AMCs) and community physicians seeking to establish a clinically integrated network (CIN) may benefit from a road map to navigate the opportunities and challenges of such an organizational structure. Creating and participating in a CIN requires careful consideration, investment of time, financial resources, alignment of a new quality infrastructure, shared governance, and vision. POTENTIAL BENEFITS, CHALLENGES, AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS: Potential AMC benefits include geographic clinical expansion, the ability to provide care for a broader population of patients, a mechanism to collaborate with regional physician graduates, and an expansion of available teaching sites for trainees. Potential benefits to community practices include propagation of high-value care, enhanced access to evidence-based protocols and priority measures, preparation for value-based reimbursement structures, and connection to an institution that produces future health care practitioners. Challenges to CIN creation include goal alignment, trust between AMC and community partners, acceptance of common quality measures and benchmarks, access to shared data, and local adoption of quality improvement activities. QUALITY AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONSIDERATIONS: At inception the mission was to create an innovative academic-community alliance delivering high-quality, high-value, personalized care. Defining the clinical quality goals, measurement, governance, and improvement strategy, as well as information technology structure and decision making, are described. FUTURE DIRECTIONS: The network continues to grow and now includes more than 350 physicians, in 16 different specialties across 50 different independent medical practices throughout Southern California. We believe this builds a firm foundation for value-based health care.

A case study of the 1115 waiver using population health informatics to address disparities.

As participants in the California Medicaid 1115 waiver, the University of California San Diego Health (UCSDH) used population health informatics tools to address health disparities. This case study describes a modern application of health informatics to improve data capture, describe health disparities through demographic stratification, and drive reliable care through electronic medical record-based registries. We provide a details in our successful approach using (1) standardized collection of race, ethnicity, language, sexual orientation, and gender identity data, (2) stratification of 8 quality measures by demographic profile, and (3) improved quality performance through registries for wellness, social determinants of health, and chronic disease. A strong population health platform paired with executive support, physician leadership, education and training, and workflow redesign can improve the representation of diversity and drive reliable processes for care delivery that improve health equity.

Early clinical and sociodemographic experience with patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at a large American healthcare system.

BACKGROUND: Despite over 4 million cases of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States, limited data exist including socioeconomic background and post-discharge outcomes for patients hospitalized with this disease. METHODS: In this case series, we identified patients with COVID-19 admitted to 3 Partners Healthcare hospitals in Boston, Massachusetts between March 7th, 2020, and March 30th, 2020. Patient characteristics, treatment strategies, and outcomes were determined. FINDINGS: A total of 247 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified; the median age was 61 (interquartile range [IQR]: 50-76 years), 58% were men, 30% of Hispanic ethnicity, 21% enrolled in Medicaid, and 12% dual-enrolled Medicare/Medicaid. The median estimated household income was $66,701 [IQR: $50,336-$86,601]. Most patients were treated with hydroxychloroquine (72%), and statins (76%; newly initiated in 34%). During their admission, 103 patients (42%) required intensive care. At the end of the data collection period (June 24, 2020), 213 patients (86.2%) were discharged alive, 2 patients (0.8%) remain admitted, and 32 patients (13%) have died. Among those discharged alive (n = 213), 70 (32.9%) were discharged to a post-acute facility, 31 (14.6%) newly required supplemental oxygen, 19 (8.9%) newly required tube feeding, and 34 (16%) required new prescriptions for antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, methadone, or opioids. Over a median post-discharge follow-up of 80 days (IQR, 68-84), 22 patients (10.3%) were readmitted. INTERPRETATION: Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 are frequently of vulnerable socioeconomic status and often require intensive care. Patients who survive COVID-19 hospitalization have substantial need for post-acute services.

Physicians' Perspectives on Palliative Care for Patients With End-Stage Liver Disease: A National Survey Study.

Specialty palliative care (PC) is underused for patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD). We sought to examine attitudes of hepatologists and gastroenterologists about PC for patients with ESLD. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of these specialists who provide care to patients with ESLD. Participants were recruited from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases membership directory. Using a questionnaire adapted from prior studies, we examined physicians' attitudes about PC and whether these attitudes varied based on patients' candidacy for liver transplantation. We identified predictors of physicians' attitudes about PC using linear regression. Approximately one-third of eligible physicians (396/1236, 32%) completed the survey. Most (95%) believed that centers providing care to patients with ESLD should have PC services, and 86% trusted PC clinicians to care for their patients. Only a minority reported collaborating frequently with inpatient (32%) or outpatient (11%) PC services. Most believed that when patients hear the term PC, they feel scared (94%) and anxious (87%). Most (83%) believed that patients would think nothing more could be done for their underlying disease if a PC referral was suggested. Physicians who believed that ESLD is a terminal condition (B = 1.09; P = 0.006) reported more positive attitudes about PC. Conversely, physicians with negative perceptions of PC for transplant candidates (B = -0.22; standard error = 0.05; P < 0.001) reported more negative attitudes toward PC. In conclusion, although most hepatologists and gastroenterologists believe that patients with ESLD should have access to PC, they reported rarely collaborating with PC teams and had substantial concerns about patients' perceptions of PC. Interventions are needed to overcome misperceptions of PC and to promote collaboration with PC clinicians for patients with ESLD.

Barriers to Use of Palliative Care and Advance Care Planning Discussions for Patients With End-Stage Liver Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite evidence for the benefits of palliative care (PC) referrals and early advance care planning (ACP) discussions for patients with chronic diseases, patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) often do not receive such care. We sought to examine physicians' perceptions of the barriers to PC and timely ACP discussions for patients with ESLD. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of hepatologists and gastroenterologists who provide care to adult patients with ESLD, recruited from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases 2018 membership registry. Using a questionnaire adapted from prior studies, we assessed physicians' perceptions of barriers to PC use and timely ACP discussions; 396 of 1236 eligible physicians (32%) completed the questionnaire. RESULTS: The most commonly cited barriers to PC use were cultural factors that affect perception of PC (by 95% of respondents), unrealistic expectations from patients about their prognosis (by 93% of respondents), and competing demands for clinicians' time (by 91% of respondents). Most respondents (81%) thought that ACP discussions with patients who have ESLD typically occur too late in the course of illness. The most commonly cited barriers to timely ACP discussions were insufficient communication between clinicians and families about goals of care (by 84% of respondents) and insufficient cultural competency training about end-of-life care (81%). CONCLUSION: There are substantial barriers to use of PC and timely discussions about ACP-most hepatologists and gastroenterologists believe that ACP occurs too late for patients with ESLD. Strategies are needed to overcome barriers and increase delivery of high-quality palliative and end-of-life care to patients with ESLD.

Opioid prescribing practices in patients undergoing surgery for oral cavity cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Opioids have been overprescribed after general and orthopedic surgeries, but prescribing patterns have not been reported for head and neck surgery. The objectives of this retrospective review are to describe postoperative opioid prescriptions after oral cancer surgery and determine which patients receive higher amounts. METHODS: A single institution retrospective review was performed for 81 adults with oral cavity tumors undergoing surgery. Opioid prescriptions upon discharge were reported in daily oral morphine equivalents (OME). High opioids were defined as > 90 mg daily and > 200 mg total, commensurate with U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention and state guidelines. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to investigate factors associated with high opioids. RESULTS: The median number of doses dispensed was 30 (interquartile range [IQR] 30-45; range 3-120). The median daily dose was 30 mg (IQR 20-45 mg; range 15-240 mg). Five patients (6%) received higher than the recommended daily dose. The median total dispensed amount was 225 mg (IQR 150-250 mg; range 15-1200 mg). Fifty-one (63%) received greater than the recommended total dose. On multivariable logistic regression, advanced tumor stage (odds ratio [OR] 11.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-109.4; P = 0.034) and inpatient pain scores (OR 1.3 per 1-unit increase; 95% CI 1.0-1.7; P = 0.039) were associated with receiving high total opioids after surgery. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients received greater than the recommended 200 mg total OME. Advanced stage and higher inpatient pain scores were associated with receiving more opioids for discharge. Consensus-driven analgesic plans are needed to reduce excess opioids after discharge following head and neck surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 128:2361-2366, 2018.