Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) in children

Introduction. Extrahepatic portal vein obstruction is an important cause of portal hypertension among children. The etiology is heterogeneous and there are few evidences related to the optimal treatment. Aim and methods. To establish guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of EHPVO in children, a group of gastroenterologists and pediatric surgery experts reviewed and analyzed data reported in the literature and issued evidence-based recommendations.Results. Pediatric EHPVO is idiopathic in most of the cases. Digestive hemorrhage and/or hypersplenism are the main symptoms. Doppler ultrasound is a non-invasive technique with a high degree of accuracy for the diagnosis. Morbidity is related to variceal bleeding, recurrent thrombosis, portal biliopathy and hypersplenism. Endoscopic therapy is effective in controlling acute variceal hemorrhage and it seems that vasoactive drug therapy can be helpful. For primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding, there are insufficient data for the use of beta blockers or endoscopic therapy. For secondary prophylaxis, sclerotherapy or variceal band ligation is effective; there is scare evidence to recommend beta-blockers. Surgery shunt is indicated in children with variceal bleeding who fail endoscopic therapy and for symptomatic hypersplenism; spleno-renal or meso-ilio-cava shunting is the alternative when Mesorex bypass is not feasible due to anatomic problems or in centers with no experience.Conclusions. Prospective control studies are required for a better knowledge of the natural history of EHPVO, etiology identification including prothrombotic states, efficacy of beta-blockers and comparison with endoscopic therapy on primary and secondary prophylaxis

Contemporary use of cefazolin for MSSA infective endocarditis: analysis of a national prospective cohort

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the real use of cefazolin for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infective endocarditis (IE) in the Spanish National Endocarditis Database (GAMES) and to compare it with antistaphylococcal penicillin (ASP). Methods: Prospective cohort study with retrospective analysis of a cohort of MSSA IE treated with cloxacillin and/or cefazolin. Outcomes assessed were relapse; intra-hospital, overall, and endocarditis-related mortality; and adverse events. Risk of renal toxicity with each treatment was evaluated separately. Results: We included 631 IE episodes caused by MSSA treated with cloxacillin and/or cefazolin. Antibiotic treatment was cloxacillin, cefazolin, or both in 537 (85%), 57 (9%), and 37 (6%) episodes, respectively. Patients treated with cefazolin had significantly higher rates of comorbidities (median Charlson Index 7, P <0.01) and previous renal failure (57.9%, P <0.01). Patients treated with cloxacillin presented higher rates of septic shock (25%, P = 0.033) and new-onset or worsening renal failure (47.3%, P = 0.024) with significantly higher rates of in-hospital mortality (38.5%, P = 0.017). One-year IE-related mortality and rate of relapses were similar between treatment groups. None of the treatments were identified as risk or protective factors. Conclusion: Our results suggest that cefazolin is a valuable option for the treatment of MSSA IE, without differences in 1-year mortality or relapses compared with cloxacillin, and might be considered equally effective