Treatment of fecal impaction in children using combined polyethylene glycol and sodium picosulphate

Background and Aim: Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is the gold standard for fecal disimpaction in constipation. A regimen of PEG combined with the stimulant laxative sodium picosulphate (SPS) produced fecal disimpaction in chronically constipated children in the community, but it is unknown if it is effective for more severe constipation. To determine the stool output and effect of a combined PEG and SPS regimen on fecaloma in children with severe constipation and impaction. Methods: Children with symptoms for a duration of >= 2 years, a palpable fecaloma, and enlarged rectum on X-ray (rectal: pelvic ratio > 0.6) were recruited from a tertiary hospital. Daily diaries recorded laxative dose, stool frequency, volume, and consistency (Bristol stool scale, BSS). Abdominal X-rays were taken on day 1 and day 8, and stool loading was assessed using the Leech score. Laxative doses were based on the child's age. The dose of PEG with electrolytes taken was 2-8 sachets (14.7 g/sachet) on days 1-2, reducing to 2-6 sachets on day 3. The SPS dose was 15-20 drops on days 2-3. Results: Eighty-nine children (4-18 years) produced a large volume of soft stool (median/inter-quartile-range: 2.2/1.6-3.1 L) over 7 days. Stool volume on X-rays decreased significantly in the colon (P <0.001). Fecalomas resolved in 40 of 89 children, while 49 needed a second high dose. Rectal: pelvic ratios did not change. Conclusions: A combined high dose of PEG and SPS on days 1 and 2 was effective in removing the fecaloma in half of the children. Administering high doses for a longer period should be tested to provide outpatient disimpaction for severe fecalomas. Rectums remained flaccid after emptying

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field