Experiencia de teduglutide como tratamiento del síndrome de intestino corto / Experience with teduglutide as a treatment for short bowel síndrome

El síndrome de intestino corto (SIC) es un trastorno metabólico que produce malabsorción. Afecta a aquellos pacientes que han perdido, de forma anatómica o funcional, una parte de su intestino1. En adultos, la principal causa es la isquemia intestinal primaria o secundaria y menos frecuentemente puede ser consecuencia de una enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal o enteritis rádica. La mortalidad a medio plazo es alta debida al elevado riesgo de complicaciones por sepsis a causa del catéter, el sobrecrecimiento bacteriano o fallo hepático asociado a la nutrición parenteral (NP)2. (AU)

Short bowel syndrome (SBS) is a metabolic disorder that causes malabsorption. It affects patients who have anatomically or functionally lost part of their intestine1. In adults, the main cause is primary or secondary intestinal ischemia and less frequently it may be a consequence of inflammatory bowel disease or radicular enteritis. Mid-term mortality is high due to the high risk of complications from catheter-related sepsis, bacterial overgrowth or liver failure associated with parenteral nutrition (PN)2. (AU)

Tratamiento con inhibidores de la bomba de protones. ¿Realmente lo necesita el paciente? / Proton-pump inhibitors treatment. Does your patient really need it?

Introducción: Los inhibidores de la bomba de protones (IBP) son fármacos utilizados frecuentemente para el manejo de diferentes enfermedades gastrointestinales. Aunque sus indicaciones y dosis están bien establecidas, se han comunicado elevadas tasas de maluso. Métodos: Estudio observacional transversal realizado en un servicio de urgencias de un hospital terciario. Pacientes adultos que acudían por distintas patologías fueron invitados a participar. Se evaluó la correcta indicación del IBP, además de su dosis, duración del tratamiento y facultativo prescriptor. Resultados: Se incluyeron 300 pacientes. La indicación se consideró correcta en 142 pacientes (47,3%), siendo la indicación más frecuente la profilaxis de enteropatía inducida por AINE/AAS (n=95; 31,7%). La «gastroprotección» en paciente polimedicados, sin fármacos gastroerosivos fue la principal indicación inadecuada (n=82; 27,3%) seguida de la profilaxis innecesaria en pacientes menores de 60 años tratados en monoterapia con un fármaco gastroerosivo. La mediana del tiempo de prescripción fue de 31 meses (RIC: 9-72) con un intervalo de 1-360 meses. El tiempo de prescripción era inferior en aquellos con indicación correcta (42,3 vs. 59,6 meses, p=0,02). El médico de atención primaria era el prescriptor más frecuente (n=165; 55%), seguido del gastroenterólogo (n=38; 12,7%), sin encontrar diferencias significativas en cuanto a la adecuación de la prescripción. Conclusiones: Estudios como el presente alertan de la persistencia de unas elevadas sobreutilización y maluso de los IBP. La desprescripción, cuando el IBP no está indicado, puede ayudar a controlar el gasto sanitario innecesario y a evitar iatrogenia (AU)

Introduction: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) are frequently prescribed for wide gastrointestinal disorders. The indications are well established, although a high rate of misuse has been reported. Methods: Observation cross-sectional study conducted a tertiary hospital. Adult patients who attended the emergency department were eligible. The appropriate indication was evaluated. Also, the prescription period, dosage and the prescribing clinician were reviewed. Results: 300 patients were included. The indication was adequate in 142 patients (47.3%). The main indication was the primary prophylaxis for NSAIDs/ASA-induced enteropathy (n=95 patients, 31.7%). Polypharmacy was the main misuse indication (n=82 patients, 27.3%). The median prescription duration was 31 months (IQR 9-72), ranging from one month to 360 months. The duration was lower in those with correct indication (42.3 vs 59.6 months, P=.02). The primary care physician was the main responsible for prescription (n=165 patients, 55%), followed by gastroenterologist (n=38 patients, 12.7%) without significant differences in appropriateness by speciality. Conclusions: Studies like this raise awareness about the PPI overuse and misuse. Deprescribing should be considered as essential to reduce iatrogenic risk and redundant health expenditure (AU)

[Proton-pump inhibitors treatment. Does your patient really need it?] / Tratamiento con inhibidores de la bomba de protones. ¿Realmente lo necesita el paciente?

INTRODUCTION: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) are frequently prescribed for wide gastrointestinal disorders. The indications are well established, although a high rate of misuse has been reported. METHODS: Observation cross-sectional study conducted a tertiary hospital. Adult patients who attended the emergency department were eligible. The appropriate indication was evaluated. Also, the prescription period, dosage and the prescribing clinician were reviewed. RESULTS: 300 patients were included. The indication was adequate in 142 patients (47.3%). The main indication was the primary prophylaxis for NSAIDs/ASA-induced enteropathy (n=95 patients, 31.7%). Polypharmacy was the main misuse indication (n=82 patients, 27.3%). The median prescription duration was 31 months (IQR 9-72), ranging from one month to 360 months. The duration was lower in those with correct indication (42.3 vs 59.6 months, P=.02). The primary care physician was the main responsible for prescription (n=165 patients, 55%), followed by gastroenterologist (n=38 patients, 12.7%) without significant differences in appropriateness by speciality. CONCLUSIONS: Studies like this raise awareness about the PPI overuse and misuse. Deprescribing should be considered as essential to reduce iatrogenic risk and redundant health expenditure.

Utility of Oral Anticoagulants as Prophylaxis of Recurrent Portal Thrombosis after Liver Transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a relatively common finding in patients undergoing liver transplantation. Although the recommendation to prevent its recurrence is anticoagulation for a duration of 3 to 6 months, this is controversial. AIM: The aim of our study was to determine the efficacy of oral anticoagulants (OAC) as prophylaxis for recurrent PVT after liver transplantation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study included 215 liver transplant patients who underwent surgery in our center from January 2012 to August 2017. We selected all patients diagnosed with PVT either pre-transplantation (using Doppler echography or Angio-CT) or during transplant surgery. All patients with PVT were initially anticoagulated with low-molecular-weight heparin in the postoperative period; at discharge they received OAC for a duration of six months. Control Doppler ultrasound was performed at 3, 6, and 12 months post-transplantation. RESULTS: PVT was identified in 37 out of 215 patients (17.2%). PVT was diagnosed with a pre-transplant vascular study in 17 out of 37 cases (45.9%). All patients were anticoagulated with OAC (warfarin) for at least 6 months. There were no cases of recurrent thrombosis and no complications associated with anticoagulant treatment throughout the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of portal thrombosis in liver transplant patients in our study was fairly high, at 17.2%. PVT was identified in nearly 50% of patients using high-quality vascular studies prior to transplant surgery. Anticoagulation with OAC for 6 months was effective in preventing a recurrence of thrombosis and there were no associated complications.

Efficacy of Direct-acting Antivirals to Improve Clinical Condition, Fibrosis, and Liver Function in Liver Transplant Recipients Infected by Hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have revolutionized the treatment of hepatitis C, including transplant recipients with an advanced fibrosis stage. Our aim in this study was to assess the clinical and functional benefits and improvement in liver fibrosis after treatment with DAAs in liver transplant recipients with chronic hepatitis C virus who achieved sustained virologic response (SVR). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 42 patients who underwent liver transplantation (LT) at our institution and were treated with DAAs from June 2014 to December 2015. Two patients died, so we ultimately included 40 transplant patients with chronic hepatitis C who received DAAs and achieved SVR. We assessed liver function, fibrosis stage, and clinical features at the start of the treatment, and then at 6 and 12 months after SVR. The indication for LT was hepatocellular carcinoma in 8 patients (20%) and Child-Pugh score B/C in 32 patients (80%). RESULTS: The DAAs regimens were sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir (45.0%), simeprevir plus sofosbuvir (42.5%), sofosbuvir plus ledipasvir (7.5%), and ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir (5%). The mean Modified End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score pretreatment was 10.78, and was 8.46 at 1 year after treatment (P < .05). In addition, fibrosis stage decreased significantly from 14.81 kPa to 9.07 kPa (FibroScan) at 12 months after SVR. Clinically, there was a significant improvement, including control of ascites and chronic hepatic encephalopathy. CONCLUSION: DAAs were used successfully in the treatment of hepatitis C after orthotopic liver transplantation and resulted in significant improvement in liver function as measured by MELD score, fibrosis level, and cirrhotic clinical condition, even in patients with very advanced disease.