Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients With Fecal Occult Positive Stool Prior to Cardiac Catheterization in Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS).

Introduction Cardiac catheterization is an essential component of patient care in Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) has been used in the inpatient setting to evaluate the risk of bleeding with dual anti-platelet therapy prior to cardiac catheterization although no guidelines exist for this indication and FOBT testing in the inpatient setting is not recommended for evaluation of GI blood loss. We sought to assess the outcomes of patients with fecal occult positive stool prior to cardiac catheterization compared to those that did not undergo FOBT during admission for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Methods We identified patients between 18 and 90 years old with admission for NSTEMI in the Trinetx Research Network from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2020. Patients were then divided into those who had an FOBT prior to cardiac catheterization and those that did not have an FOBT. We compared all-cause mortality, bleeding, troponin levels, and length of stay between propensity-matched (PSM) pairs of patients. Results We identified 46,349 that met inclusion criteria, of which 1,728 had an FOBT (3.7%) and 44,621 (96.3%) had no FOBT prior to cardiac catheterization. Patients in the FOBT group were older and had a higher prevalence of hypertension, coronary artery disease, heart failure, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and higher BMI. Two well-matched groups of n=1,728/1,728 were used for comparing outcomes. The FOBT group had similar 30-day mortality (4.45% vs 4.01, P=0.56) as well as similar bleeding events (0.98% vs 0.69%, P=0.35). Troponin levels in the FOBT group were on average lower (0.41 vs 0.95, P=0.04). The FOBT groups also had a similar average length of stay of (14.1 days vs 14.2 days, P=0.42). 233 patients who received FOBT underwent endoscopic evaluation with either upper endoscopy or colonoscopy (13.5%), and there was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (6.86% vs 4.7%, P=0.321). Among patients who underwent endoscopy, 72 had some form of endoscopic intervention (30.9%). There was no difference in 30-day mortality between patients undergoing endoscopy with intervention and without intervention (14.49%/14.49%) P=1.00. Readmission was similar between patients undergoing endoscopy with and without intervention. Conclusions In a large multi-center national database, we observed similar outcomes in patients who were admitted with NSTEMI and had FOBT and those not receiving FOBT in terms of all-cause mortality and bleeding events. In patients with positive FOBT, endoscopy with and without intervention we observed no significant difference in 30-day mortality. We conclude that there is no compelling evidence for FOBT testing in patients with NSTEMI.

Risk of COVID-19 Infection After Full Immunization in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Treatment: A Research Network Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an issue in treating patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) due to concerns for infection risk and poor post-vaccination antibody response. We examined the potential impact of IBD treatments on SARS-CoV-2 infection rates after full immunization against COVID-19. METHODS: Patients who received vaccines between January 2020 and July 2021 were identified. The post-immunization Covid-19 infection rate at 3 and 6 months was assessed in IBD patients receiving treatment. The infection rates were compared to patients without IBD.  Results: The total number of IBD patients was 143,248; of those (n=9405), 6.6% were fully vaccinated. In IBD patients taking biologic agents/small molecules, no difference in Covid-19 infection rate was found at 3 (1.3% vs. 0.97%, p=0.30) and 6 months (2.2% vs. 1.7%, p=0.19) when compared to non-IBD patients. No significant difference in Covid-19 infection rate was found among patients receiving systemic steroids at 3 (1.6% vs. 1.6%, p=1) and 6 months (2.6% vs. 2.9%, p=0.50) between the IBD and non-IBD cohorts.  Conclusions: The COVID-19 immunization rate is suboptimal among IBD patients (6.6%). Vaccination in this cohort is under-utilized and should be encouraged by all healthcare providers.

A Nationwide Analysis of Fluid Resuscitation Outcomes in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, fluid resuscitation has been the foundation of effective acute pancreatitis (AP) treatment. Experts advocate for aggressive intravenous fluid (IVF) resuscitation, especially within the first 24 hours. Research suggests limited efficacy of this approach; in fact, some studies show there may be a risk of increased complications. The aim of this study was to assess outcomes of aggressive IVF resuscitation in patients with AP. METHODS: We queried the TriNetX Research Network (Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States) for patients admitted between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2020, with a diagnosis of AP and who had received IVF on admission for at least 24 hours. We compared two cohorts; cohort 1 consisted of patients receiving aggressive IVF resuscitation (>3 ml/kg/hr), and cohort 2 was comprised of patients receiving non-aggressive (≤1.5 ml/kg/hr) IVF resuscitation. We compared mortality during index hospitalization, hospital length of stay (HLS), mechanical ventilation rates, acute kidney injury (AKI), and severe sepsis between the cohorts with propensity scoring matched (PSM) pairs of patients. A sub-analysis of patients with severe AP was performed. RESULTS: After comparing the two well-matched PSM cohorts (3,680/3,680), we found no significant differences in mortality, HLS, mechanical ventilation rates, AKI, or severe sepsis. We found similar results after conducting the sub-analysis of patients with severe pancreatitis. CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant differences in mortality and HLS when comparing rates of IVF resuscitation.

The Effect of Ivermectin on Cases of COVID-19.

Ivermectin is an antiviral agent that has historically had a wide variety of uses. Recently, it has gained popularity in the mainstream media for use in treating and preventing COVID-19 infection, prompting high sales in veterinary grade Ivermectin. Studies are increasingly looking at Ivermectin as a possible agent for prevention and treatment of COVID-19, however further information is needed to assess efficacy and safety. Our project aimed to evaluate mortality differences in patients with COVID-19 infection who were prescribed Ivermectin vs. those not prescribed Ivermectin. Adult patients with active COVID-19 infection who were not prescribed Ivermectin (n = 797,285 Outpatient, n = 481,705 Inpatient, and n = 58,050 Intensive care unit), and those prescribed Ivermectin (n = 804 Outpatient, n = 1774 Inpatient, and n = 107 Intensive care unit) were evaluated. The cohorts were then evaluated for mortality comparing patients prescribed Ivermectin and those not prescribed Ivermectin in the Outpatient (7.7 % vs 2.2 %, P < 0.001), Inpatient not requiring Intensive Care (15.6 % vs 7.2 %, P ≤ 0.001), and Intensive care (20.6 % vs 19.6 %, P = 0.86) treatment settings.

Acute Pancreatitis Due to COVID-19 Active Infection.

Background This study investigates the relationship between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and acute pancreatitis. We present large registry data assessing the association between acute pancreatitis and mortality in patients with COVID-19 post-infection. Methods The researchers identified adult patients aged 18-90 years with COVID-19 infections in the TriNetX (COVID-19 research network) database between January 20, 2020, and June 1, 2021. The researchers identified n=1,039,688 cases divided into two cohorts: those with post-acute pancreatitis (n= 1,173) and those without post-acute pancreatitis (n=1,038,515) post COVID-19 infection having follow-up within a two-week period. The researchers then conducted a 1:1 propensity score match to account for differences in the cohorts and created two well-matched cohorts (n=1,173/1,173). Results Patients that developed acute pancreatitis had higher mortality (12.4% vs 3.7%, p<0.001), stroke (3.6% vs 1.7%, p=0.005), higher inpatient admissions (28.2% vs 10.6%, p<0.001), and higher rates of ICU admission (9.5% vs 3.2%, p<0.001). Conclusion In a large multinational federated database, we observed higher mortality, stroke, higher inpatient admissions, and higher rates of ICU admissions among patients with COVID-19 with pancreatitis.