Provision and standards of care for treatment and follow-up of patients with Autoimmune Hepatitis (AIH).

Background: Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a substantial UK health burden, but there is variation in care, facilities and in opinion regarding management. We conducted an audit of service provision and care of patients with AIH in 28 UK hospitals. Methods: Centres provided information about staffing, infrastructure and patient management (measured against predefined guideline-based standards) via a web-based data collection tool. Results: Hospitals (14 university hospitals (UHs), 14 district general hospitals (DGHs)) had median (range) of 8 (3-23) gastroenterologists; including 3 (0-10) hepatologists. Eight hospitals (29%, all DGHs) had no hepatologist. In individual hospital departments, there were 50% (18-100) of all consultants managing AIH: in DGH's 92% (20-100) vs 46% (17-100) in UHs. Specialist nurses managed AIH in only 18%. Seventeen (61%) hospitals had a histopathologist with a liver interest, these were more likely to find rosettes than those without (172/795 vs 50/368; p<0.001).Of 999 steroid-treated patients with ≥12 months follow-up, 25% received steroids for <12 months. After 1 year of treatment, 82% of patients achieved normal serum alanine aminotransaminase (ALT); this was higher in UHs than DGHs. Three-monthly liver blood tests were inadequately recorded in 26%. Of potentially eligible patients with liver decompensation, transplantation was apparently not considered in 5% (n=7). The same standards were attained in different types of hospital. Conclusion: Management of AIH in UK hospitals is often shared between most gastroenterologists. Blood test monitoring and treatment duration are not always in line with recommendations. Some eligible patients with decompensation are not discussed with transplant teams. Care might be improved by expanding specialist input and management by fewer designated consultants.

Treatment and Outcome of Autoimmune Hepatitis (AIH): Audit of 28 UK centres.

BACKGROUND: With few data regarding treatment and outcome of patients with AIH outside of large centres we present such a study of patients with AIH in 28 UK hospitals of varying size and facilities. METHODS: Patients with AIH were identified in 14 University and 14 District General hospitals; incident cases during 2007-2015 and prevalent cases, presenting 2000-2015. Treatment and outcomes were analysed. RESULTS: In 1267 patients with AIH, followed-up for 3.8(0-15) years, 5- and 10-year death/transplant rates were 7.1+0.8% and 10.1+1.3% (all-cause) and 4.0+0.6% and 5.9+1% (liver-related) respectively. Baseline parameters independently associated with death/transplantation for all-causes were: older age, vascular/respiratory co-morbidity, cirrhosis, decompensation, platelet count, attending transplant centre and for liver-related: the last four of these and peak bilirubin All-cause and liver-related death/transplantation was independently associated with: non-treatment with corticosteroids, non-treatment with a steroid-sparing agent (SSA), non-treatment of asymptomatic or non-cirrhotic patients and initial dose of Prednisolone >35mg/0.5mg/kg/day (all-cause only), but not with type of steroid (Prednisolone versus Budesonide) or steroid duration beyond 12-months. Subsequent all-cause and liver-death/transplant rates showed independent associations with smaller percentage fall in serum ALT after 1 and 3-months, but not with failure to normalise levels over 12-months. CONCLUSIONS: We observed higher death/transplant rates in patients with AIH who were untreated with steroids (including asymptomatic or non-cirrhotic sub-groups), those receiving higher Prednisolone doses and those who did not receive an SSA. Similar death/transplant rates were seen in those receiving Prednisolone or Budesonide, those continuing steroids after 12-months and patients attaining normal ALT within 12-months versus not.

Time to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Results from a prospective multicentre trainee-led audit.

Background: Endoscopy within 24 h of admission (early endoscopy) is a quality standard in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB). We aimed to audit time to endoscopy outcomes and identify factors affecting delayed endoscopy (>24 h of admission). Methods: This prospective multicentre audit enrolled patients admitted with AUGIB who underwent inpatient endoscopy between November and December 2017. Analyses were performed to identify factors associated with delayed endoscopy, and to compare patient outcomes, including length of stay and mortality rates, between early and delayed endoscopy groups. Results: Across 348 patients from 20 centres, the median time to endoscopy was 21.2 h (IQR 12.0-35.7), comprising median admission to referral and referral to endoscopy times of 8.1 h (IQR 3.7-18.1) and 6.7 h (IQR 3.0-23.1), respectively. Early endoscopy was achieved in 58.9%, although this varied by centre (range: 31.0-87.5%, p = 0.002). On multivariable analysis, lower Glasgow-Blatchford score, delayed referral, admissions between 7:00 and 19:00 hours or via the emergency department were independent predictors of delayed endoscopy. Early endoscopy was associated with reduced length of stay (median difference 1 d; p = 0.004), but not 30-d mortality (p = 0.344). Conclusions: The majority of centres did not meet national standards for time to endoscopy. Strategic initiatives involving acute care services may be necessary to improve this outcome.

Diagnosis, presentation and initial severity of Autoimmune Hepatitis (AIH) in patients attending 28 hospitals in the UK.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is limited information regarding patients with AIH outside relatively few large centres. We describe here the presenting features of patients with AIH, collected as part of an audit involving 28 UK hospitals. METHODS: Patients (incident since 1/1/2007 or prevalent since 1/1/2000) were ≥18 years and either met 1999 International AIH Group (IAIHG) diagnostic criteria (n = 1164), or received immunosuppressive therapy for clinically diagnosed AIH (n = 103). RESULTS: Of 1267 patients (80% women, 91% Caucasian, age (median(range)) 55(8-86) years, 0.5% had acute viral hepatitis (CMV/EBV/HEV); 2% were taking Nitrofurantoin and 0.7% Khat. Twenty-one percent had clinical decompensation and/or a MELD score of >15. Time from first abnormal liver tests to diagnosis was ≥1 year in 19% and was longer in jaundiced vs non-jaundiced patients. HBV and HCV serology were undocumented in 4%, serum immunoglobulins in 31% and autoantibodies in 11%-27%. When documented, ≥1 antibody was present in 83%. LKM-1-positive and autoantibody-negative patients had more severe disease. Histological cirrhosis was reported in 23%, interface hepatitis 88%, predominant lymphocytes/plasma cells 75%, rosettes 19% and emperipolesis 0.4%. Only 65% of those meeting 1999 IAIHG criteria also met simplified IAIHG criteria. University Hospitals compared to District General Hospitals, were more likely to report histological features of AIH. CONCLUSIONS: This cohort from across the UK is older than other multicentre AIH cohorts. One-fifth had decompensation or MELD >15. Diagnosis was delayed in 19%, diagnostic testing was incomplete in one-third and rosettes and emperipolesis were infrequently reported.

Junior doctors' views on reporting concerns about patient safety: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Enabling healthcare staff to report concerns is critical for improving patient safety. Junior doctors are one of the groups least likely to engage in incident reporting. This matters both for the present and for the future, as many will eventually be in leadership positions. Little is known about junior doctors' attitudes towards formally reporting concerns. AIMS: To explore the attitudes and barriers to junior doctors formally reporting concerns about patient safety to the organisations in which they are training. METHODS: A qualitative study comprising three focus groups with 10 junior doctors at an Acute Teaching Hospital Trust in the Midlands, UK, conducted in 2013. Focus group discussions were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach, facilitated by NVivo 10. RESULTS: Participants were supportive of the idea of playing a role in helping healthcare organisations become more aware of risks to patient safety, but identified that existing incident reporting systems could frustrate efforts to report concerns. They described barriers to reporting, including a lack of role modelling and senior leadership, a culture within medicine that was not conducive to reporting concerns, and a lack of feedback providing evidence that formal reporting was worthwhile. They reported a tendency to rely on informal ways of dealing with concerns as an alternative to engaging with formal reporting systems. CONCLUSIONS: If healthcare organisations are to be able to gather and learn from intelligence about risks to patient safety from junior doctors, this will require attention to the features of reporting systems, as well as the implications of hierarchies and the wider cultural context in which junior doctors work.

Chemoprevention in Barrett's esophagus: A pill a day?

Esophageal adenocarcinoma is increasing in incidence. The main risk factor is the premalignant condition of Barrett's esophagus. There is great interest in chemoprevention to prevent or slow malignant transformation. There are many agents proposed as playing a role in chemoprevention; however, none is licensed for this role as yet. Aspirin possesses many favorable qualities for chemoprevention and is the focus of the largest randomized control trial in this field.

Aspirin chemoprevention of gastrointestinal cancer in the next decade. A review of the evidence.

Together, gastrointestinal (GI) cancers now account for 25% of neoplastic deaths in the West. In Poland, GI cancer rates are likely to increase further as westernization progresses. Given that conventional cancer therapies have made only modest reductions in cancer mortality, there is a great interest in chemoprevention to prevent or slow malignant transformation from premalignant lesions. The financial pressures in the immediate future require even more stringent criteria for chemopreventive agents - they must be cheap but also safe and efficacious. In this regard, several reviews have indicated that aspirin possesses many favorable qualities for chemoprevention. Furthermore, meta-analyses indicate that aspirin may decrease cancer by approximately 30%. Several large clinical trials are underway, including AspECT (Aspirin and Esomeprazole Chemoprevention Trial) that aims not only to prevent cancer but also decrease the gastric side effects by combining aspirin with potent acid-suppressing drugs. In conclusion, whether aspirin will be the world's first proven chemopreventive agent is currently unknown but the evidence looks hopeful.