Prevalence and Characteristics of Metabolic Hyperferritinemia in a Population-Based Central-European Cohort

Background: Hyperferritinemia (HF) is a common finding and can be considered as metabolic HF (MHF) in combination with metabolic diseases. The definition of MHF was heterogenous until a consensus statement was published recently. Our aim was to apply the definition of MHF to provide data on the prevalence and characteristics of MHF in a Central-European cohort. Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of the Paracelsus 10,000 study, a population-based cohort study from the region of Salzburg, Austria. We included 8408 participants, aged 40-77. Participants with HF were divided into three categories according to their level of HF and evaluated for metabolic co-morbidities defined by the proposed criteria for MHF. Results: HF was present in 13% (n = 1111) with a clear male preponderance (n = 771, 69% of HF). Within the HF group, 81% (n = 901) of subjects fulfilled the metabolic criteria and were defined as MHF, of which 75% (n = 674) were characterized by a major criterion. In the remaining HF cohort, 52% (n = 227 of 437) of subjects were classified as MHF after application of the minor criteria. Conclusion: HF is a common finding in the general middle-aged population and the majority of cases are classified as MHF. The new classification provides useful criteria for defining MHF

Iron, Oxidative Stress, and Metabolic Dysfunction—Associated Steatotic Liver Disease

Excess free iron is a substrate for the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), thereby augmenting oxidative stress. Oxidative stress is a well-established cause of organ damage in the liver, the main site of iron storage. Ferroptosis, an iron-dependent mechanism of regulated cell death, has recently been gaining attention in the development of organ damage and the progression of liver disease. We therefore summarize the main mechanisms of iron metabolism, its close connection to oxidative stress and ferroptosis, and its particular relevance to disease mechanisms in metabolic-dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease and potential targets for therapy from a clinical perspective

Feasibility of Continuous Monitoring of Endoscopy Performance and Adverse Events: A Single-Center Experience

Background: We integrated a standardized questionnaire focusing on adverse events and performance measures in gastrointestinal endoscopy as a mandatory component of the electronical medical record. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted using prospectively collected data on quality parameters and adverse events (AEPM) for all diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic procedures at our center between 2018 and 2020. Results: A total of 7532 consecutive endoscopic procedures were performed in 5035 patients. The proportion of high-risk examinations and high-risk patients was 20% and 23%, respectively. Severe adverse events (AEs, n = 21) occurred in 0.3% of procedures and significantly more often in patients with an ASA score > II (0.6%, p n = 2). Following screening colonoscopy (n = 242), four endoscopists documented AEPM in more than 98% of the examinations. The cecal intubation rate was 97%, and the mean adenoma detection rate 60%. The quality of lavage was documented in 97% (rated as good in 70% and moderate in 24%). Conclusions: The risk of adverse events is significantly increased in patients with an ASA score > II, which should be considered when choosing treatment methods and precautionary measures. Continuous recording of AEPM can be effectively integrated into the clinical reporting process, enabling analysis of the data and feedback to be provided to endoscopists

Feasibility of Continuous Monitoring of Endoscopy Performance and Adverse Events: A Single-Center Experience

Background: We integrated a standardized questionnaire focusing on adverse events and performance measures in gastrointestinal endoscopy as a mandatory component of the electronical medical record. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted using prospectively collected data on quality parameters and adverse events (AEPM) for all diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic procedures at our center between 2018 and 2020. Results: A total of 7532 consecutive endoscopic procedures were performed in 5035 patients. The proportion of high-risk examinations and high-risk patients was 20% and 23%, respectively. Severe adverse events (AEs, n = 21) occurred in 0.3% of procedures and significantly more often in patients with an ASA score > II (0.6%, p < 0.01). We observed no long-term morbidity after severe AEs. Mortality was 0.03% (n = 2). Following screening colonoscopy (n = 242), four endoscopists documented AEPM in more than 98% of the examinations. The cecal intubation rate was 97%, and the mean adenoma detection rate 60%. The quality of lavage was documented in 97% (rated as good in 70% and moderate in 24%). Conclusions: The risk of adverse events is significantly increased in patients with an ASA score > II, which should be considered when choosing treatment methods and precautionary measures. Continuous recording of AEPM can be effectively integrated into the clinical reporting process, enabling analysis of the data and feedback to be provided to endoscopists