Gastric Acid Suppressive Therapy and Community-Acquired Pneumonia, Etiology and Outcome

Background: Community acquired pneumonia (CAP) is an infection of the pulmonary parenchyma that can be caused by various microbial pathogens. Co-morbidity and medication are related to specific pathogens. Patients on gastric acid suppressive therapy have an increased risk to develop CAP. We aimed to assess whether there are specific pathogens independently associated with gastric acid suppressive therapy and its impact on infection severity. Methods: From December 2007 to January 2010, all subjects consulting the emergency care unit of a general hospital in the south of the Netherlands with a suspected CAP were prospectively registered. Each patient underwent chest radiography. Sputum, urine, nose swabs and blood samples were obtained for microbial culture, antigen detection and polymerase chain reaction techniques, respectively. To study the severity of CAP upon presentation, the validated CURB-65 score was calculated. Furthermore, we assessed hospital or intensive care admission, length of hospitalization and in-hospital mortality. We evaluated the association between use of acid suppressive therapy and microbial aetiology of CAP and severity of illness with logistic regression analysis. Results: The final cohort comprised 463 patients with CAP, defined as presence of infiltrate on chest radiography and/ or microbial aetiology. Overall 136 patients (29%) used acid suppressive therapy, mainly proton pump inhibitors (97%). Patients with acid suppressive therapy more frequently had an infection with Streptococcus pneumoniae (28% vs. 14%) and Haemophilus influenzae (10% vs. 6%), and less frequently with Coxiella burnetii (8% vs. 19%) or H1N1 influenza A virus (2% vs. 7%) in comparison to those without acid suppressive therapy. After adjustment for baseline differences, the risk of proton pump inhibitor users being infected with S. pneumonia was 2.18 times (95%Confidence Interval(CI): 1.2-3.6) higher compared to those not on acid suppressive therapy. Patients using more than one defined daily dose of a PPI had a 1.48-fold increased risk of a S. pneumoniae infection compared with patients using the defined daily dose (95%CI:1.1-2.0). No risk between PPI use and any other microbial pathogen was found. Patients with acid suppressive therapy had on average higher CURB-65 scores, longer hospital stay and subsequently a case fatality rate of 11% vs. 4% compared to those not using acid suppressive therapy. Conclusions. Proton pump inhibitor therapy predisposes with community acquired S. pneumoniae pneumonia, and was associated with higher morbidity

Nurse-Led Follow-Up at Home vs. Conventional Medical Outpatient Clinic Follow-Up in Patients With Incurable Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Randomized Study

Context: Upper gastrointestinal cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. The multidimensional problems of incurable patients require close monitoring and frequent support, which cannot sufficiently be provided during conventional one to two month follow-up visits to the outpatient clinic. Objectives: To compare nurse-led follow-up at home with conventional medical follow-up in the outpatient clinic for patients with incurable primary or recurrent esophageal, pancreatic, or hepatobiliary cancer. Methods: Patients were randomized to nurse-led follow-up at home or conventional medical follow-up in the outpatient clinic. Outcome parameters were quality of life (QoL), patient satisfaction, and health care consumption, measured by different questionnaires at one and a half and four months after randomization. As well, cost analyses were done for both follow-up strategies in the first four months. Results: In total, 138 patients were randomized, of which 66 (48%) were evaluable. At baseline, both groups were similar with respect to clinical and sociodemographic characteristics a

A limited and customized follow-up seems justified after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair in octogenarians

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine whether long-term follow-up after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is justified in octogenarians.MethodsBetween September 1996 and October 2011, all patients, including octogenarians, treated for an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) by EVAR were included in a prospective database. Patients older than 80 years and with a nonruptured infrarenal aneurysm treated electively or urgently were included in the study (study group [SG]). Patients with ruptured aneurysms and patients who died during surgery or within the first postoperative month were excluded from further analysis. The control group (CG) consisted of patients younger than 80 years, matched for gender and AAA diameter. All patients were evaluated 4 to 8 weeks after EVAR and then annually thereafter. Follow-up data were complemented by review of the computerized hospital registry and charts and by contact of the patient's general practitioner or referring hospital. Primary outcomes were stent- or aneurysm-related complications and interventions. Secondary outcomes were additional surgical complications and patient survival.ResultsA total number of 193 patients (SG, n = 97; CG, n = 96) were included for analysis. Median age was 80 years, and 88.6% were male. Median follow-up time was 33.6 months (interquartile range [IQR], 12.9-68.3). Stent- and procedure-related postoperative complications were comparable between groups (SG, 41.2%; CG, 39.6%; P = .82). Median time to complication was 2.3 months (IQR, 0.2-19.4) in the SG compared with 18.1 months (IQR, 6.8-50.5) in the CG. The 2-year complication-free survival rates were 58% (SG) and 60% (CG). Interventions were performed significantly less frequently in octogenarians (SG, 8.2%; CG, 19.8%; P < .05). Median time to intervention was 11.1 months (IQR, 2.0-31.0) in the SG compared with 54.3 months (IQR, 15.0-93.2) in the CG. The 2-year intervention-free survival rates were 90% (SG) and 92% (CG). During follow-up, 98 patients died (SG, n = 54; CG, n = 44); median time to death was 31.8 months (IQR, 13.3-66.0) in the SG compared with 44.4 months (IQR, 15.0-77.7) in the CG. One aneurysm-related death occurred in the CG. The 2- and 5-year survival rates were 71% and 32% for the SG compared with 77% and 66% for the CG (P < .05).ConclusionsBecause of the low incidence of secondary procedures and AAA-related deaths in octogenarians, long-term and frequent follow-up after EVAR seems questionable. An adapted and shortened follow-up seems warranted in this patient group

The diagnostic work-up and outcomes of ‘presumed’ idiopathic acute pancreatitis: A post-hoc analysis of a multicentre observational cohort

Introduction: After standard diagnostic work-up, the aetiology of acute pancreatitis remains unknown in 16–27% of cases, a condition referred to as idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). Determining the aetiology of pancreatitis is essential, as it may direct treatment in the acute phase and guides interventions to prevent recurrent pancreatitis. Methods: Between 2008 and 2015, patients with acute pancreatitis were registered prospectively in 19 Dutch hospitals. Patients who had a negative initial diagnostic work-up with regard to the underlying aetiology of their pancreatitis were labelled ‘presumed’ IAP. The aim of this study was to assess the use of diagnostic modalities and their yield to establish an aetiology in ‘presumed’ IAP, and to assess recurrence rates both with and without treatment. Results: Out of the 1632 registered patients, 191 patients had a first episode of ‘presumed’ IAP, of whom 176 (92%) underwent additional diagnostic testing: CT (n = 124, diagnostic yield 8%), EUS (n = 62, yield 35%), MRI/MRCP (n = 56, yield 33%), repeat ultrasound (n = 97, yield 21%), IgG4 (n = 54, yield 9%) and ERCP (n = 15, yield 47%). In 64 of 176 patients (36%) an aetiological diagnosis was established, mostly biliary (n = 39). In 13 out of 176 of patients (7%) a neoplasm was diagnosed. If additional diagnostic workup revealed an aetiology, the recurrence rate was lower in the treated patients than in the patients without a definite aetiology (15% versus 43%, p = 0.014). Conclusion: Additional diagnostic testing revealed an aetiology in one-third of ‘presumed’ IAP patients. The aetiology found was mostly biliary, but occasionally neoplasms were found. Identification of an aetiology with subsequent treatment reduced the rate of recurrence

T is associated with severe dyspepsia

Contains fulltext : 96333.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access

Precision and accuracy in measuring absence from work as a basis for calculating productivity costs in The Netherlands

The impact of disease on the ability of a person to perform work should be part of an economic evaluation when a societal viewpoint is used for the analysis. This impact is reflected by calculating productivity costs. Measurement of these costs is often performed retrospectively. The purpose of our study was to study precision and accuracy of a retrospective self-administered questionnaire on sick leave. Employees of a company were asked to indicate the number of days absent from work due to illness during the past 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 2 months, 6 months, and the past 12 months. The percentage of respondents with an absolute difference of a maximum of respectively 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 or more days between reported, and company-registered absence due to illness was determined. Besides this, the proportional difference was calculated. A systematic difference was tested with a signed rank test. Of the reported data, 95% matched the registered data perfectly when the recall period was limited to 2 and 4 weeks. This percentage decreased to 87%, 57%, and 51% for 2 months, 6 months, and 12 months. The weighted mean proportional differences for the recall periods were respectively 32.9, 35.2, 45.3, 34.9, and 113.6%. No systematic positive or negative difference was found between registered and reported sick leave. The results suggest that the recall period for retrospective measurement of sick leave is limited according to the precision level, which seems to be appropriate for the subject and the purpose of the study. We recommend using a recall period of no more than 2 months.Productivity cost Cost analysis Questionnaire Precision Recall bias Cost-effectiveness analyses The Netherlands