Role of early endoscopic evaluation in decreasing morbidity, mortality, and cost after caustic ingestion: a retrospective nationwide database analysis.

Caustic substance ingestion (CSI) is a serious medical problem with potentially devastating short- and long-term consequences. Early upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (EaEn) is recommended to evaluate the extent of injury and guide management but there has been controversy about the timing. There is no nationwide study evaluating adherence to EaEn and outcomes following CSI.Nationwide Inpatient Sample database 2003-2011 was used to identify all-age, nonreferral, urgent/emergent admissions with E-International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision codes for CSI. We evaluated the association of undergoing late endoscopy (LaEn, >48 hours since admission) with poor clinical (death or systemic complications) and economic (cost for admission and length of stay above the 75th percentile) outcomes after controlling for other demographic and clinical factors using a multivariate analysis.We identified 21,682 patients with a median age of 37 years, 51% males, 43% Caucasians, with suicidal ingestion reported in 40%. Endoscopy was performed in 6011 patients (37%). The majority had EaEn (43% within 24, and 40% within 24-48 hours), whereas 17% had LaEn.Compared to EaEn group, the LaEn group was associated with a three-fold increase (OR = 2.7, P < 0.001) in the risk for poor clinical outcome: a fourfold increase (OR = 4.6, P < 0.001) in high cost admissions, and a fivefold increase (OR = 4.9, P < 0.001) in prolonged hospitalization. There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes based on endoscopy within 24, and 24-48 hours of admission.In this retrospective nationwide database analysis, undergoing LaEn was associated with both negative clinical and economic outcomes. More studies are needed to further examine the reasons for delaying endoscopy and subsequent management pathways based on the endoscopic findings. Early endoscopic evaluation could potentially improve the clinical outcomes and reduce costs of these admissions.

A prospective randomized trial comparing sequential ganciclovir-high dose acyclovir to high dose acyclovir for prevention of cytomegalovirus disease in adult liver transplant recipients.

Cytomegalovirus disease is an important cause of morbidity following liver transplantation. To date there has not been an effective prophylaxis for CMV disease after liver transplantation. One hundred forty-three patients were randomized to receive either high dose oral acyclovir (800 mg 4 times a day) alone for 3 months after transplantation (acyclovir group) or intravenous ganciclovir (5 mg/kg twice a day) for 14 days followed by high dose oral acyclovir to complete a 3-month regimen (ganciclovir group). Of 139 patients available for evaluation, 43 of 71 (61%) patients from the acyclovir group developed CMV infection compared with 16 of 68 (24%) from the ganciclovir group (relative risk, 3.69; 95% confidence interval, 2.07-6.56; P < 0.00001). Of those randomized, CMV disease was seen in 20 (28%) of the acyclovir group compared with 6 (9%) of the ganciclovir group (relative risk, 5.11; 95% confidence interval, 2.05-12.75; P = 0.0001). The median time to onset of CMV infection was 45 days in the acyclovir group compared with 78 days in the ganciclovir group (P = 0.004). The median time to onset of CMV disease was 40 days in the acyclovir group compared with 78 days in the ganciclovir patients (P = 0.02). With respect to primary CMV infection, there was no difference in the rates in the 2 groups, but tissue invasive disease and recurrent CMV disease were less frequent in the ganciclovir group. It is concluded that a course of 2 weeks of ganciclovir immediately after transplantation followed by high dose oral acyclovir for 10 weeks is superior to a 12-week course of high dose oral acyclovir alone for prevention of both CMV infection and CMV disease after liver transplantation. However, the lack of significant effect in seronegative recipients who received grafts from seropositive donors suggests that other strategies are needed to prevent CMV infection in this high risk population.