Blood ammonia levels in liver cirrhosis: a clue for the presence of portosystemic collateral veins

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Portal hypertension leads to the formation of portosystemic collateral veins in liver cirrhosis. The resulting shunting is responsible for the development of portosystemic encephalopathy. Although ammonia plays a certain role in determining portosystemic encephalopathy, the venous ammonia level has not been found to correlate with the presence or severity of this entity. So, it has become partially obsolete. Realizing the need for non-invasive markers mirroring the presence of esophageal varices in order to reduce the number of endoscopy screening, we came back to determine whether there was a correlation between blood ammonia concentrations and the detection of portosystemic collateral veins, also evaluating splenomegaly, hypersplenism (thrombocytopenia) and the severity of liver cirrhosis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>One hundred and fifty three consecutive patients with hepatic cirrhosis of various etiologies were recruited to participate in endoscopic and ultrasonography screening for the presence of portosystemic collaterals mostly esophageal varices, but also portal hypertensive gastropathy and large spontaneous shunts.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Based on Child-Pugh classification, the median level of blood ammonia was 45 mcM/L in 64 patients belonging to class A, 66 mcM/L in 66 patients of class B and 108 mcM/L in 23 patients of class C respectively (p < 0.001).</p> <p>The grade of esophageal varices was concordant with venous ammonia levels (rho 0.43, p < 0.001). The best area under the curve was given by ammonia concentrations, i, e., 0.78, when comparing areas of ammonia levels, platelet count and spleen longitudinal diameter at ultrasonography. Ammonia levels predicted hepatic decompensation and ascites presence (Odds Ratio 1.018, p < 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Identifying cirrhotic patients with high blood ammonia concentrations could be clinically useful, as high levels would lead to suspicion of being in presence of collaterals, in clinical practice of esophageal varices, and pinpoint those patients requiring closer follow-up and endoscopic screening.</p

The Italian version of the quick mild cognitive impairment (Qmci-I) screen: normative study on 307 healthy subjects

OBJECTIVE: To devise an Italian version of the quick mild cognitive impairment screen (Qmci) and to obtain normative data. METHODS: An Italian version of the Qmci screen (Qmci-I) was administered to 307 subjects free from cognitive impairment. The normative sample was divided into three age levels (50-59; 60-69 and 70-80 years) and four education levels (3-5; 6-8; 9-13; >13 years of school attendance). Multiple regression analyses were used to evaluate the effect of age, sex and schooling on Qmci-I scores (overall and by domains) and to calculate cut-off values, with reference to the confidence interval on the fifth centile. RESULTS: The mean Qmci-I score was 64/100 (SD = 11). The age variable showed a significant negative effect on the overall Qmci-I score, with older people performing worse than younger ones. Conversely, education was associated with higher scores. Significant effects of age and education affected logical memory alone. For the other domains, the following effects were found: (1) higher age associated with lower scores on delayed recall; (2) higher education levels associated with higher scores on immediate recall, clock drawing and word fluency. The adjusted cut-off score for the Qmci-I screen in this sample was 49.4. Qmci-I scores were weakly correlated with those of MMSE (rho = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: The Qmci-I is a rapid and multi-domain short cognitive screening instrument useful for evaluating cognitive functions. However, like other screening tools, it is significantly influenced by age and education, requiring normative data and correction of values when used in the clinical practice

Vaccination in Asplenia: Improving Quality of Care in Time of Coronavirus.

Our study aims to evaluate influenza vaccination in a large population of asplenic patients and explore the main causes for non-vaccination to identify critical areas for improvement in the vaccination programme in these at-risk patients for the 2020-2021 influenza seaso