Obesity and Gastroesophageal Reflux: Quantifying the Association Between Body Mass Index, Esophageal Acid Exposure, and Lower Esophageal Sphincter Status in a Large Series of Patients with Reflux Symptoms

Obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are increasingly important health problems. Previous studies of the relationship between obesity and GERD focus on indirect manifestations of GERD. Little is known about the association between obesity and objectively measured esophageal acid exposure. The aim of this study is to quantify the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and 24-h esophageal pH measurements and the status of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) in patients with reflux symptoms. Data of 1,659 patients (50% male, mean age 51 ± 14) referred for assessment of GERD symptoms between 1998 and 2008 were analyzed. These subjects underwent 24-h pH monitoring off medication and esophageal manometry. The relationship of BMI to 24-h esophageal pH measurements and LES status was studied using linear regression and multiple regression analysis. The difference of each acid exposure component was also assessed among four BMI subgroups (underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese) using analysis of variance and covariance. Increasing BMI was positively correlated with increasing esophageal acid exposure (adjusted R 2 = 0.13 for the composite pH score). The prevalence of a defective LES was higher in patients with higher BMI (p < 0.0001). Compared to patients with normal weight, obese patients are more than twice as likely to have a mechanically defective LES [OR = 2.12(1.63–2.75)]. An increase in body mass index is associated with an increase in esophageal acid exposure, whether BMI was examined as a continuous or as a categorical variable; 13% of the variation in esophageal acid exposure may be attributable to variation in BMI

Patients started on hemodialysis with tunneled dialysis catheter have similar survival after arteriovenous fistula and arteriovenous graft creation

exterior, courtyard, 198

Predictors and outcomes of restenosis following tibial artery endovascular interventions for critical limb ischemia

ObjectiveRestenosis following tibial artery endovascular interventions (TAEIs) is thought to be benign but is not well characterized. This study examines the consequences and predictors of recurrent stenosis of TAEIs for critical limb ischemia.MethodsAll TAEIs for critical limb ischemia performed between 2004 and 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. Restenosis was detected by noninvasive imaging and angiography when indicated. Restenoses were identified and the limb outcomes recorded. Tibial reinterventions were performed only for persistent, worsening, or recurrent tissue loss or rest pain with evidence of recurrence on duplex ultrasound or hemodynamic imaging. The χ2 test and logistic regression were applied as indicated. One-year patency rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.ResultsA total of 235 limbs in 210 patients were treated for critical limb ischemia (70% tissue loss, 30% rest pain). Tissue loss included gangrene (49%) and ulcers (51%), and involved the forefoot (80%), the heel (14%), or both (6%). Seventy-eight percent of limbs had Trans-Atlantic InterSociety Consensus C/D lesions, with mean preoperative runoff score of 12. Interventions were isolated tibial (45%) or multilevel (55%) (including tibial). Mean postoperative runoff score improved to 6.6, but restenosis occurred in 96 limbs (41%) at a mean of 4 months. The 1-year primary patency was 59% with a mean follow-up of 9 months. Restenosis presented with a persistent wound (32%), worsened wound (42%), rest pain (16%), or no symptoms (10%). A repeat TAEI was performed in 42 (44%), major amputation in 26 (27%), open bypass in 20 (21%), and observation in eight (8%). The overall amputation rate was 13%, but limb loss was significantly higher in patients with restenosis (n = 26 [27%]) than in patients with no restenosis (n = 5 [4%]; P < .001). Patients with restenosis and tissue loss were more likely to have presented with gangrene (63% vs 38%; P = .0003) but had comparable wound distribution (P = NS). There was a trend toward a higher restenosis rate in patients with renal insufficiency (odds ratio, 5.57; P = .08), but this was unaffected by diabetes, statin therapy, or smoking (P = NS). The rate of repeat intervention after the first reintervention was 36%, with an 87% overall limb salvage rate.ConclusionsTAEIs can be used successfully to treat patients with critical limb ischemia with acceptable limb salvage rates. Special attention should be given to patients with extensive tissue loss or gangrene because they are at risk for early restenosis and subsequent limb loss. Strict wound and hemodynamic surveillance, wound care, and timely reinterventions are crucial to achieve successful outcomes in this patient population. Amputation or alternative revascularization options, when feasible, should be considered in patients with restenosis and tissue loss given the high rate of limb loss with tibial reinterventions