Ectopic cardiovascular fat in middle-aged men: effects of race/ethnicity, overall and central adiposity. The ERA JUMP study.

Background/objectivesHigher volumes of ectopic cardiovascular fat (ECF) are associated with greater risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). Identifying factors that are associated with ECF volumes may lead to new preventive efforts to reduce risk of CHD. Significant racial/ethnic differences exist for overall and central adiposity measures, which are known to be associated with ECF volumes. Whether racial/ethnic differences also exist for ECF volumes and their associations with these adiposity measures remain unclear.Subjects/methodsBody mass index (BMI), computerized tomography-measured ECF volumes (epicardial, pericardial and their summation) and visceral adipose tissue (VAT) were examined in a community-based sample of 1199 middle-aged men (24.2% Caucasians, 7.0% African-Americans, 23.6% Japanese-Americans, 22.0% Japanese, 23.2% Koreans).ResultsSignificant racial/ethnic differences existed in ECF volumes and their relationships with BMI and VAT. ECF volumes were the highest among Japanese-Americans and the lowest among African-Americans. The associations of BMI and VAT with ECF differed by racial/ethnic groups. Compared with Caucasians, for each 1-unit increase in BMI, African-Americans had lower, whereas Koreans had higher increases in ECF volumes (P-values<0.05 for both). Meanwhile, compared with Caucasians, for each 1-unit increase in log-transformed VAT, African-Americans, Japanese-Americans and Japanese had similar increases, whereas Koreans had a lower increase in ECF volumes (P-value<0.05).ConclusionsRacial/ethnic groups differed in their propensity to accumulate ECF at increasing level of overall and central adiposity. Future studies should evaluate whether reducing central adiposity or overall weight will decrease ECF volumes more in certain racial/ethnic groups. Evaluating these questions might help in designing race-specific prevention strategy of CHD risk associated with higher ECF

Interobserver agreement for single operator choledochoscopy imaging: can we do better?

Background. The SpyGlass Direct Visualization System (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA) is routinely used during single operator choledochoscopy (SOC) to identify biliary lesions or strictures with a diagnostic accuracy up to 88%. The objective of this study was to determine the interobserver agreement (IOA) of modified scoring criteria for diagnosing biliary lesions/strictures. Methods. 27 SPY SOC video clips were reviewed and scored by 9 interventional endoscopists based on published criteria that included the presence and severity of surface structure, vasculature visualization, lesions, and findings. Results. Overall IOA was slight for all variables. The K statistics are as follows: surface (K = 0.12, SE = 0.02); vessels (K = 0.14, SE = 0.02); lesions (K = 0.11, SE = 0.02); findings (K = 0.08, SE = 0.03); and final diagnosis (K = 0.08, SE = 0.02). The IOA for findings and final diagnosis was also only slight. The final diagnosis was malignant (11), benign (11), and indeterminate (5). Conclusion. IOA using the modified criteria of SOC images was slight to almost poor. The average accuracy was less than 50%. These findings reaffirm that imaging criteria for benign and malignant biliary pathology need to be formally established and validated

Aspiration therapy for the treatment of obesity: 4-year results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BackgroundThe AspireAssist is the first Food and Drug Administration-approved endoluminal device indicated for treatment of class II and III obesity.ObjectivesWe earlier reported 1-year results of the PATHWAY study. Here, we report 4-year outcomes.SettingUnited States-based, 10-center, randomized controlled trial involving 171 participants with the treatment arm receiving Aspiration Therapy (AT) plus Lifestyle Therapy and the control arm receiving Lifestyle Therapy (2:1 randomization).MethodsAT participants were permitted to continue in the study for an additional year up to a maximum of 5 years providing they maintained at least 10% total weight loss (TWL) from baseline at each year end. For AT participants who continued the study, 5 medical monitoring visits were provided at weeks 60, 68, 76, 90, and 104 and thereafter once every 13 weeks up to week 260. Exclusion criteria were a history of eating disorder or evidence of eating disorder on a validated questionnaire. Follow-up weight, quality of life, and co-morbidities were compared with the baseline levels. In addition, rates of serious adverse event, persistent fistula, withdrawal, and A-tube replacement were reported. All analyses were performed using a per-protocol analysis.ResultsOf the 82 AT participants who completed 1 year, 58 continued to this phase of the trial. Mean baseline body mass index of these 58 patients was 41.6 ± 4.5 kg/m2. At the end of first year (at the beginning of the follow-up study), these 58 patients had a body mass index of 34.1 ± 5.4 kg/m2 and had achieved an 18.3 ± 8.0% TWL. On a per protocol basis, patients experienced 14.2%, 15.3%, 16.6%, and 18.7% TWL at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years, respectively (P < .01 for all). Forty of 58 patients (69%) achieved at least 10% TWL at 4 years or at time of study withdrawal. Improvements in quality of life scores and select cardiometabolic parameters were also maintained through 4 years. There were 2 serious adverse events reported in the second through fourth years, both of which resolved with removal or replacement of the A tube. Two persistent fistulas required surgical repair, representing approximately 2% of all tube removals. There were no clinically significant metabolic or electrolytes disorders observed, nor any evidence for development of any eating disorders.ConclusionsThe results of this midterm study have shown that AT is a safe, effective, and durable weight loss alternative for people with class II and III obesity and who are willing to commit to using the therapy and adhere to adjustments in eating behavior

Esophageal sphincter device for gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease who have a partial response to proton-pump inhibitors often seek alternative therapy. We evaluated the safety and effectiveness of a new magnetic device to augment the lower esophageal sphincter. METHODS We prospectively assessed 100 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease before and after sphincter augmentation. The study did not include a concurrent control group. The primary outcome measure was normalization of esophageal acid exposure or a 50% or greater reduction in exposure at 1 year. Secondary outcomes were 50% or greater improvement in quality of life related to gastroesophageal reflux disease and a 50% or greater reduction in the use of proton-pump inhibitors at 1 year. For each outcome, the prespecified definition of successful treatment was achievement of the outcome in at least 60% of the patients. The 3-year results of a 5-year study are reported. RESULTS The primary outcome was achieved in 64% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 54 to 73). For the secondary outcomes, a reduction of 50% or more in the use of proton-pump inhibitors occurred in 93% of patients, and there was improvement of 50% or more in quality-of-life scores in 92%, as compared with scores for patients assessed at baseline while they were not taking proton-pump inhibitors. The most frequent adverse event was dysphagia (in 68% of patients postoperatively, in 11% at 1 year, and in 4% at 3 years). Serious adverse events occurred in six patients, and in six patients the device was removed. CONCLUSIONS In this single-group evaluation of 100 patients before and after sphincter augmentation with a magnetic device, exposure to esophageal acid decreased, reflux symptoms improved, and use of proton-pump inhibitors decreased. Follow-up studies are needed to assess long-term safety. (Funded by Torax Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00776997.

Inflammatory expression profiles in monocyte-to-macrophage differentiation in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and relationship with atherosclerosis

Introduction: Our objectives were to examine mononuclear cell gene expression profiles in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and healthy controls and to compare subsets with and without atherosclerosis to determine which genes' expression is related to atherosclerosis in SLE.Methods: Monocytes were obtained from 20 patients with SLE and 16 healthy controls and were in vitro-differentiated into macrophages. Subjects also underwent laboratory and imaging studies to evaluate for subclinical atherosclerosis. Whole-genome RNA expression microarray was performed, and gene expression was examined.Results: Gene expression profiling was used to identify gene signatures that differentiated patients from controls and individuals with and without atherosclerosis. In monocytes, 9 out of 20 patients with SLE had an interferon-inducible signature compared with 2 out of 16 controls. By looking at gene expression during monocyte-to-macrophage differentiation, we identified pathways which were differentially regulated between SLE and controls and identified signatures based on relevant intracellular signaling molecules which could differentiate SLE patients with atherosclerosis from controls. Among patients with SLE, we used a previously defined 344-gene atherosclerosis signature in monocyte-to-macrophage differentiation to identify patient subgroups with and without atherosclerosis. Interestingly, this signature further classified patients on the basis of the presence of SLE disease activity and cardiovascular risk factors.Conclusions: Many genes were differentially regulated during monocyte-to-macrophage differentiation in SLE patients compared with controls. The expression of these genes in mononuclear cells is important in the pathogenesis of SLE, and molecular profiling using gene expression can help stratify SLE patients who may be at risk for development of atherosclerosis

Rectal indomethacin alone versus indomethacin and prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for preventing pancreatitis after ERCP: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background The combination of prophylactic pancreatic stent placement (PSP) – a temporary plastic stent placed in the pancreatic duct – and rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is recommended for preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) in high-risk cases. Preliminary data, however, suggest that PSP may be unnecessary if rectal NSAIDs are administered. Given the costs and potential risks of PSP, we aim to determine whether rectal indomethacin obviates the need for pancreatic stent placement in patients undergoing high-risk ERCP. Methods/Design The SVI (Stent vs. Indomethacin) trial is a comparative effectiveness, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority study of rectal indomethacin alone versus the combination of rectal indomethacin and PSP for preventing PEP in high-risk cases. One thousand four hundred and thirty subjects undergoing high-risk ERCP, in whom PSP is planned solely for PEP prevention, will be randomized to indomethacin alone or combination therapy. Those who are aware of study group assignment, including the endoscopist, will not be involved in the post-procedure care of the patient for at least 48 hours. Subjects will be assessed for PEP and its severity by a panel of independent and blinded adjudicators. Indomethacin alone will be declared non-inferior to combination therapy if the two-sided 95 % upper confidence bound of the treatment difference is less than 5 % between the two groups. Biological specimens will be obtained from trial participants and centrally banked. Discussion The SVI trial is designed to determine whether PSP remains necessary in the era of NSAIDs pharmacoprevention. The associated bio-repository will establish the groundwork for important scientific breakthrough. Trial registration NCT02476279, registered June 2015

Rectal indomethacin alone versus indomethacin and prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for preventing pancreatitis after ERCP: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: The combination of prophylactic pancreatic stent placement (PSP) - a temporary plastic stent placed in the pancreatic duct - and rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is recommended for preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) in high-risk cases. Preliminary data, however, suggest that PSP may be unnecessary if rectal NSAIDs are administered. Given the costs and potential risks of PSP, we aim to determine whether rectal indomethacin obviates the need for pancreatic stent placement in patients undergoing high-risk ERCP. Methods/Design: The SVI (Stent vs. Indomethacin) trial is a comparative effectiveness, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority study of rectal indomethacin alone versus the combination of rectal indomethacin and PSP for preventing PEP in high-risk cases. One thousand four hundred and thirty subjects undergoing high-risk ERCP, in whom PSP is planned solely for PEP prevention, will be randomized to indomethacin alone or combination therapy. Those who are aware of study group assignment, including the endoscopist, will not be involved in the post-procedure care of the patient for at least 48 hours. Subjects will be assessed for PEP and its severity by a panel of independent and blinded adjudicators. Indomethacin alone will be declared non-inferior to combination therapy if the two-sided 95 % upper confidence bound of the treatment difference is less than 5 % between the two groups. Biological specimens will be obtained from trial participants and centrally banked. Discussion: The SVI trial is designed to determine whether PSP remains necessary in the era of NSAIDs pharmacoprevention. The associated bio-repository will establish the groundwork for important scientific breakthrough