Immunohistochemical inflammation in histologically normal gallbladders containing gallstones.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to establish features of inflammation in histologically normal gallbladders with gallstones and compare the expression of inflammatory markers in acutely and chronically inflamed gallbladders. METHODS: Immunohistochemistry was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded gallbladders for tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-2R, and substance p in three groups: Group I (n = 60) chronic cholecystitis, Group II (n = 57) acute cholecystitis and Group III (n = 45) histologically normal gallbladders with gallstones. Expression was quantified using the H-scoring system. RESULTS: Median, interquartile range expression of mucosal IL-2R in Groups I (2.65, 0.87-7.97) and II (12.30, 6.15-25.55) was significantly increased compared with group III (0.40, 0.10-1.35, p < 0.05). Submucosal IL-2R expression in Groups I (2.0, 1.12-4.95) and II (10.0, 5.95-14.30) was also significantly increased compared with Group III (0.50, 0.15-1.05, p < 0.05). There was no difference in the lymphoid cell IL-6 expression between Groups I (5.95, 1.60-18.15), II (6.10, 1.1-36.15) and III (8.30, 2.60-26.35, p > 0.05). Epithelial IL-6 expression of Group III (8.3, 2.6-26.3) was significantly increased compared with group I (0.5, 0-10.2, p < 0.05) as was epithelial TNF-α expression in Group III (85.0, 70.50-92.0) compared with Groups I (72.50, 45.25.0-85.50, p < 0.05) and II (61.0, 30.0-92.0, p < 0.05). Lymphoid cell Substance P expression in Groups I (1.90, 1.32-2.65) and II (5.62, 2.50-20.8) was significantly increased compared with Group III (1.0,1.0-1.30, p < 0.05). Epithelial cell expression of Substance P in Group III (121.7, 94.6-167.8) was significantly increased compared with Groups I (75.7, 50.6-105.3, p < 0.05) and II (78.9, 43.5-118.5, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Histologically normal gallbladders with gallstones exhibited features of inflammation on immunohistochemistry.

Immunohistochemical Inflammation in Histologically Normal Appendices in Patients with Right Iliac Fossa Pain.

BACKGROUND: Histologically normal appendices resected for right iliac fossa pain in children demonstrate immunohistochemical markers of inflammation. We aimed to establish if subclinical inflammation was present in histologically normal appendices resected from adults with right iliac fossa pain. METHODS: Immunohistochemistry was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded appendices for tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-2R and serotonin in four groups: Group I (n = 120): uncomplicated appendicitis, Group II (n = 118): complicated appendicitis (perforation or gangrene), Group III (n = 104): histologically normal appendices resected for right iliac fossa pain and Group IV (n = 106) appendices resected at elective colectomy. Expression was quantified using the H-scoring system. RESULTS: Median, interquartile range expression of TNF-α was increased in Groups I (5.9, 3.1-9.8), II (6.8, 3.6-12.1) and III (9.8, 6.2-15.2) when compared with Group IV (3.0, 1.4-4.7, p < 0.01). Epithelial expression of IL-6 in Groups II (44.0, 8.0-97.0) and III (71.0, 18.5-130.0) was increased when compared with Group IV (9.5, 1.0-60.2, p < 0.01). Expression of mucosal IL-2R in Groups I (47.4, 34.8-69.0), II (37.8, 25.4-60.4) and III (18.4, 10.1-34.7) was increased when compared with Group IV (2.8, 1.2-5.7, p < 0.01). Serotonin content in Groups I (3.0, 0-30.0) and II (0, 0-8.5) was decreased when compared with Groups III (49.7, 16.7-107.5) and IV (43.5, 9.5-115.8, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Histologically normal appendices resected from symptomatic patients exhibited increased proinflammatory cytokine expression on immunohistochemistry suggesting the presence of an inflammatory process not detected on conventional microscopy.

Perioperative Probiotics or Synbiotics in Adults Undergoing Elective Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To define the impact of perioperative treatment with probiotics or synbiotics on postoperative outcome in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. BACKGROUND: Postoperative surgical infection accounts for a third of all cases of sepsis, and is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics (preparations that combine probiotics and prebiotics) are nutritional adjuncts that are emerging as novel therapeutic modalities for preventing surgical infections. However, current evidence on their effects is conflicting. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, and WHO Global Index Medicus electronic databases was performed to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating probiotics or synbiotics in adult patients undergoing elective colorectal, upper gastrointestinal, transplant, or hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery. Bibliographies of studies were also searched. The primary outcome measure was incidence of postoperative infectious complications. Secondary outcomes included incidence of noninfectious complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, and any treatment-related adverse events. Quantitative pooling of the data was undertaken using a random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 34 randomized controlled trials reporting on 2723 participants were included. In the intervention arm, 1354 patients received prebiotic or symbiotic preparations, whereas 1369 patients in the control arm received placebo or standard care. Perioperative administration of either probiotics or synbiotics significantly reduced the risk of infectious complications following abdominal surgery [relative risk (RR) 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46-0.69; P < 0.00001, n = 2723, I = 42%]. Synbiotics showed greater effect on postoperative infections compared with probiotics alone (synbiotics RR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.33-0.66; P < 0.0001, n = 1399, I = 53% probiotics RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53-0.80; P < 0.0001, n = 1324, I = 18%). Synbiotics but not probiotics also led to a reduction in total length of stay (synbiotics weighted mean difference: -3.89; 95% CI: -6.60 to -1.18 days; P = 0.005, n = 535, I = 91% probiotics RR: -0.65; 95% CI: -2.03-0.72; P = 0.35, n = 294, I = 65%). There were no significant differences in mortality (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.54-1.80; P = 0.96, n = 1729, I = 0%) or noninfectious complications between the intervention and control groups. The preparations were well tolerated with no significant adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: Probiotics and synbiotics are safe and effective nutritional adjuncts in reducing postoperative infective complications in elective abdominal surgery. The treatment effects are greatest with synbiotics.

Chemical and elemental analysis of the edible fruit of five Carpobrotus species from South Africa: assessment of nutritional value and potential metal toxicity.

Edible wild fruits of five Carpobrotus species (C. acinaciformis, C. deliciosus, C. dimidiatus, C. edulis subspecies edulis and C. mellei) were assessed for their nutritional value by determining the proximate chemical composition. Fruits were high in moisture (77.6% to 90.3%), carbohydrates (58.8% to 70.3%) and energy (1240 to 1370 kJ 100 g-1), with adequate amounts of protein (8.1% to 26.0%) and low in lipids (0.9% to 2.4%). Elemental concentrations were in decreasing order of Ca > Mg > Fe > Mn > Zn ~ Cu > Cr > Se ~ Ni ~ Co. Most fruits were rich in Cr (contributing between 30% and 143% towards its RDA) and C. delicious and C. mellei being rich in Mn, contributing 49 to 156% towards its RDA. Except for C. dimidiatus, toxicity studies revealed all species to contain low levels of toxic metals (As, Cd and Pb) making them suitable for human consumption.

Iron therapy for preoperative anaemia.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative anaemia is common and occurs in 5% to 76% of patients preoperatively. It is associated with an increased risk of perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion, longer hospital stay, and increased morbidity and mortality. Iron deficiency is one of the most common causes of anaemia. Oral and intravenous iron therapy can be used to treat anaemia. Parenteral iron preparations have been shown to be more effective in conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease, chronic heart failure and postpartum haemorrhage due to rapid correction of iron stores. A limited number of studies has investigated iron therapy for the treatment of preoperative anaemia. The aim of this Cochrane Review is to summarise the evidence for iron supplementation, both enteral and parenteral, for the management of preoperative anaemia. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of preoperative iron therapy (enteral or parenteral) in reducing the need for allogeneic blood transfusions in anaemic patients undergoing surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We ran the search on 30 July 2018. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE(R), Embase Classic and Embase (Ovid), CINAHL Plus (EBSCO), PubMed, and clinical trials registries, and we screened reference lists. We ran a top-up search on 28 November 2019; one study is now awaiting classification. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared preoperative iron monotherapy to placebo, no treatment, standard care or another form of iron therapy for anaemic adults undergoing surgery. We defined anaemia as haemoglobin values less than 13 g/dL for males and 12 g/dL for non-pregnant females. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors collected data and a third review author checked all collected data. Data were collected on the proportion of patients who receive a blood transfusion, the amount of blood transfused per patient (units), quality of life, ferritin levels and haemoglobin levels, measured as continuous variables at the following predetermined time points: pretreatment (baseline), preoperatively but postintervention, and postoperatively. We performed statistical analysis using the Cochrane software, Review Manager 5. We summarised outcome data in tables and forest plots. We used the GRADE approach to describe the quality of the body of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Six RCTs, with a total of 372 participants, evaluated preoperative iron therapy to correct anaemia before planned surgery. Four studies compared iron therapy (either oral (one study) or intravenous (three studies)) with no treatment, placebo or usual care, and two studies compared intravenous iron therapy with oral iron therapy. Iron therapy was delivered over a range of periods that varied from 48 hours to three weeks prior to surgery. The 372 participants in our analysis fall far short of the 819 required - as calculated by our information size calculation - to detect a 30% reduction in blood transfusions. Five trials, involving 310 people, reported the proportion of participants who received allogeneic blood transfusions. Meta-analysis of iron therapy versus placebo or standard care showed no difference in the proportion of participants who received a blood transfusion (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.70; 4 studies, 200 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Only one study that compared oral versus intravenous iron therapy measured this outcome, and reported no difference in risk of transfusion between groups. There was no difference between the iron therapy and placebo/standard care groups for haemoglobin level preoperatively at the end of the intervention (mean difference (MD) 0.63 g/dL, 95% CI -0.07 to 1.34; 2 studies, 83 participants; low-quality evidence). However, intravenous iron therapy produced an increase in preoperative postintervention haemoglobin levels compared with oral iron (MD 1.23 g/dL, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.65; 2 studies, 172 participants; low-quality evidence). Ferritin levels were increased by intravenous iron, both when compared to standard care ((MD 149.00, 95% CI 25.84 to 272.16; 1 study, 63 participants; low-quality evidence) or to oral iron (MD 395.03 ng/mL, 95% CI 227.72 to 562.35; 2 studies, 151 participants; low-quality evidence). Not all studies measured quality of life, short-term mortality or postoperative morbidity. Some measured the outcomes, but did not report the data, and the studies which did report the data were underpowered. Therefore, uncertainty remains regarding these outcomes. The inclusion of new research in the future is very likely to change these results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The use of iron therapy for preoperative anaemia does not show a clinically significant reduction in the proportion of trial participants who received an allogeneic blood transfusion compared to no iron therapy. Results for intravenous iron are consistent with a greater increase in haemoglobin and ferritin when compared to oral iron, but do not provide reliable evidence. These conclusions are drawn from six studies, three of which included very small numbers of participants. Further, well-designed, adequately powered, RCTs are required to determine the true effectiveness of iron therapy for preoperative anaemia. Two studies are currently in progress, and will include 1500 randomised participants.

Prevalence of a history of prior varicella/herpes zoster infection in multiple sclerosis.

Varicella zoster virus (VZV) infection has been implicated in multiple sclerosis (MS), but direct causal involvement has been disputed. Nevertheless, knowledge of VZV exposure is important, given the risk of serious complications of first exposure while undergoing immunosuppressive treatment, in particular with fingolimod. We distributed questionnaires to MS clinic patients, requesting information about history of chickenpox, sibling/household/occupational exposure, history of zoster (shingles), and disease-modifying treatment. A random, proportionally representative sample of 51 patients that included patients with positive, negative, and unknown chickenpox history were selected for determination of VZV IgG by ELISA. Of 1206 distributed questionnaires, 605 were returned (50% response rate). Of these, 86% reported history of chickenpox, 5.6% gave negative history, and 8.5% did not know. Of 594 who answered the zoster question, 78% gave a negative response, 4% did not know, and 104 (17%) answered yes. Of these, 83 reported 1 episode; 12 had 2; 5 had 3; and 1 each reported 5, 6, and 15 episodes. Of 51 patients tested for VZV IgG (44 "yes," 4 "no," and 3 "I don't know" answers to the question of whether they had chickenpox), 48 were seropositive; the 3 seronegative all had reported having had chickenpox. The high rate of MS patients reporting prior chickenpox infection is comparable with previous reports. A substantial proportion of MS patients, estimated to be higher than an age-matched general population, report single or multiple episodes of zoster. These data are useful for consideration of immunosuppressive treatments and/or VZV and zoster vaccination.

Antibiotics Versus Appendicectomy for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Uncomplicated acute appendicitis has been managed traditionally by early appendicectomy. However, recently, there has been increasing interest in the potential for primary treatment with antibiotics, with studies finding this to be associated with fewer complications than appendicectomy. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of antibiotic therapy with appendicectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. METHOD: This meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials included adult patients presenting with uncomplicated acute appendicitis treated with antibiotics or appendicectomy. The primary outcome measure was complications. Secondary outcomes included treatment efficacy, hospital length of stay (LOS), readmission rate and incidence of complicated appendicitis. RESULTS: Five randomised controlled trials with a total of 1430 participants (727 undergoing antibiotic therapy and 703 undergoing appendicectomy) were included. There was a 39 % risk reduction in overall complication rates in those treated with antibiotics compared with those undergoing appendicectomy (RR 0.61, 95 % CI 0.44-0.83, p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in hospital LOS (mean difference 0.25 days, 95 % CI -0.05 to 0.56, p = 0.10). In the antibiotic cohort, 123 of 587 patients initially treated successfully with antibiotics were readmitted with symptoms suspicious of recurrent appendicitis. The incidence of complicated appendicitis was not increased in patients who underwent appendicectomy after "failed" antibiotic treatment (10.8 %) versus those who underwent primary appendicectomy (17.9 %). CONCLUSION: Increasing evidence supports the primary treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics, in terms of complications, hospital LOS and risk of complicated appendicitis. Antibiotics should be prescribed once a diagnosis of acute appendicitis is made or considered.

Effect of a quadrivalent meningococcal ACWY glycoconjugate or a serogroup B meningococcal vaccine on meningococcal carriage: an observer-blind, phase 3 randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Meningococcal conjugate vaccines protect individuals directly, but can also confer herd protection by interrupting carriage transmission. We assessed the effects of meningococcal quadrivalent glycoconjugate (MenACWY-CRM) or serogroup B (4CMenB) vaccination on meningococcal carriage rates in 18-24-year-olds. METHODS: In this phase 3, observer-blind, randomised controlled trial, university students aged 18-24 years from ten sites in England were randomly assigned (1:1:1, block size of three) to receive two doses 1 month apart of Japanese Encephalitis vaccine (controls), 4CMenB, or one dose of MenACWY-CRM then placebo. Participants were randomised with a validated computer-generated random allocation list. Participants and outcome-assessors were masked to the treatment group. Meningococci were isolated from oropharyngeal swabs collected before vaccination and at five scheduled intervals over 1 year. Primary outcomes were cross-sectional carriage 1 month after each vaccine course. Secondary outcomes included comparisons of carriage at any timepoint after primary analysis until study termination. Reactogenicity and adverse events were monitored throughout the study. Analysis was done on the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all enrolled participants who received a study vaccination and provided at least one assessable swab after baseline. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT01214850. FINDINGS: Between Sept 21 and Dec 21, 2010, 2954 participants were randomly assigned (987 assigned to control [984 analysed], 979 assigned to 4CMenB [974 analysed], 988 assigned to MenACWY-CRM [983 analysed]); 33% of the 4CMenB group, 34% of the MenACWY-CRM group, and 31% of the control group were positive for meningococcal carriage at study entry. By 1 month, there was no significant difference in carriage between controls and 4CMenB (odds ratio 1·2, 95% CI 0·8-1·7) or MenACWY-CRM (0·9, [0·6-1·3]) groups. From 3 months after dose two, 4CMenB vaccination resulted in significantly lower carriage of any meningococcal strain (18·2% [95% CI 3·4-30·8] carriage reduction), capsular groups BCWY (26·6% [10·5-39·9] carriage reduction), capsular groups CWY (29·6% [8·1-46·0] carriage reduction), and serogroups CWY (28·5% [2·8-47·5] carriage reduction) compared with control vaccination. Significantly lower carriage rates were also noted in the MenACWY-CRM group compared with controls: 39·0% (95% CI 17·3-55·0) carriage reduction for serogroup Y and 36·2% (15·6-51·7) carriage reduction for serogroup CWY. Study vaccines were generally well tolerated, with increased rates of transient local injection pain and myalgia in the 4CMenB group. No safety concerns were identified. INTERPRETATION: Although we detected no significant difference between groups at 1 month after vaccine course, MenACWY-CRM and 4CMenB vaccines reduced meningococcal carriage rates during 12 months after vaccination and therefore might affect transmission when widely implemented. FUNDING: Novartis Vaccines.

Hydration and outcome in older patients admitted to hospital (The HOOP prospective cohort study).

BACKGROUND: Older adults are susceptible to dehydration due to age-related pathophysiological changes. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of hyperosmolar dehydration (HD) in hospitalised older adults, aged ≥65 years, admitted as an emergency and to assess the impact on short-term and long-term outcome. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was performed on older adult participants who were admitted acutely to a large U.K. teaching hospital. Data collected included the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), national early warning score (NEWS), Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA) clinical frailty scale and Nutrition Risk Screening Tool (NRS) 2002. Admission bloods were used to measure serum osmolality. HD was defined as serum osmolality >300 mOsmol/kg. Participants who were still in hospital 48 h after admission were reviewed, and the same measurements were repeated. RESULTS: A total of 200 participants were recruited at admission to hospital, 37% of whom were dehydrated. Of those dehydrated, 62% were still dehydrated when reviewed at 48 h after admission. Overall, 7% of the participants died in hospital, 79% of whom were dehydrated at admission (P = 0.001). Cox regression analysis adjusted for age, gender, CCI, NEWS, CSHA and NRS demonstrated that participants dehydrated at admission were 6 times more likely to die in hospital than those euhydrated, hazards ratio (HR) 6.04 (1.64-22.25); P = 0.007. CONCLUSIONS: HD is common in hospitalised older adults and is associated with poor outcome. Coordinated efforts are necessary to develop comprehensive hydration assessment tools to implement and monitor a real change in culture and attitude towards hydration in hospitalised older adults.

Iron therapy for pre-operative anaemia.

BACKGROUND: Pre-operative anaemia is common and occurs in up to 76% of patients. It is associated with increased peri-operative allogeneic blood transfusions, longer hospital lengths of stay and increased morbidity and mortality. Iron deficiency is one of the most common causes of this anaemia. Oral iron therapy has traditionally been used to treat anaemia but newer, safer parenteral iron preparations have been shown to be more effective in other conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease, chronic heart failure and post-partum haemorrhage. A limited number of studies look at iron therapy for the treatment of pre-operative anaemia. The aim of this Cochrane review is to summarise the evidence for use of iron supplementation, both enteral and parenteral, for the management of pre-operative anaemia. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review is to evaluate the effects of pre-operative iron therapy (enteral or parenteral) in reducing the need for allogeneic blood transfusions in anaemic patients undergoing surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We ran the search on 25 March 2015. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE(R), EMBASE Classic and EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL Plus (EBSCO), PubMed, clinical trials registries, conference abstracts, and we screened reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared pre-operative iron monotherapy to placebo, no treatment, standard of care or another form of iron therapy for anaemic adults undergoing surgery. Anaemia was defined by haemoglobin values less than 13 g/dL for males and 12 g/dL for non-pregnant females. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were collected by two authors on the proportion of patients who receive a blood transfusion, amount of blood transfused per patient (units) and haemoglobin measured as continuous variables at pre-determined time-points: pre-treatment, pre-operatively but post-treatment, and post-operatively. Statistical analysis was performed using the Cochrane statistical software, Review Manager 2014. Outcome data were summarised in tables and a forest plot. MAIN RESULTS: Three prospective randomised controlled studies evaluated pre-operative iron therapy to correct anaemia (two in colorectal and one in gynaecological surgery) and included 114 patients in total. One compared oral iron versus standard care (Lidder 2007); one intravenous iron versus control (Edwards 2009); and one study compared oral versus intravenous iron (Kim 2009). Both colorectal trials reported the primary outcome (proportion of patients who received allogeneic blood transfusions) and meta-analysis showed a reduction in blood transfusions with the administration of iron therapy, but the reduction was not statistically significant (risk ratio (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 1.18). All studies reported haemoglobin change but data for the anaemic patients were only available for two studies (Edwards 2009 and Kim 2009). Edwards 2009 showed no difference in haemoglobin at the end of treatment pre-operatively. The intravenous versus oral iron study showed an increase in haemoglobin with intravenous iron at the end of treatment pre-operatively (MD 1.90 g/dL, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.64; participants = 56), but the results are at high risk of bias because participants with less than 80% compliance with therapy were excluded from the analysis and compliance was lower in the oral iron group due to the side-effects of treatment (Kim 2009).None of the studies reported quality of life, short- or long-term mortality or post-operative morbidity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The use of iron therapy for pre-operative anaemia does not show a statistically significant reduction in the proportion of patients who received an allogeneic blood transfusion compared to no iron therapy. However, the 38 patients in our analysis falls far short of the 819 patients our information size calculation recommended to detect a 30% reduction in blood transfusions. Intravenous iron may be more effective than oral iron at increasing haemoglobin. However, all these conclusions are drawn from only three small randomised controlled studies. Further well designed, adequately powered randomised controlled studies are required to determine the true effectiveness of iron therapy for pre-operative anaemia.