16 research outputs found
Enhanced Liver Fibrosis Score Can Be Used to Predict Liver-Related Events in Patients With Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis and Compensated Cirrhosis
Improving Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery in Patients With Cirrhosis in the United States: A Nationwide Assessment
Introduction: With increasing burden of obesity and liver disease in the United States, a better understanding of bariatric surgery in context of cirrhosis is needed. We described trends of hospital-based outcomes of bariatric surgery among cirrhotics and determined effect of volume status and type of surgery on these outcomes.
Methods: In this population-based study, admissions for bariatric surgery were extracted from the National Inpatient Sample using International Classification of Diseases, 9th and 10th Revision, Clinical Modification codes from 2004 to 2016 and grouped by cirrhosis status, type of bariatric surgery, and center volume. In-hospital mortality, complications, and their trends were compared between these groups using weighted counts, odds ratios [ORs], and logistic regression.
Results: Among 1,679,828 admissions for bariatric surgery, 9,802 (0.58%) had cirrhosis. Cirrhosis admissions were more likely to be in white men, had higher Elixhauser Index, and higher in-hospital complications rates including death (1.81% vs 0.17%), acute kidney injury (4.5% vs 1.2%), bleeding (2.9% vs 1.1%), and operative complications (2% vs 0.6%) (P < 0.001 for all) compared to those without cirrhosis. Overtime, restrictive surgeries have grown in number (12%-71%) and complications rates have trended down in both groups. Cirrhotics undergoing bariatric surgery at low-volume centers (<50 procedures per year) and nonrestrictive surgery had a higher inpatient mortality rate (adjusted OR 4.50, 95% confidence interval 3.14-6.45, adjusted OR 4.00, 95% confidence interval 2.68-5.97, respectively).
Discussion: Contemporary data indicate that among admissions for bariatric surgery, there is a shift to restrictive-type surgeries with an improvement in-hospital complications and mortality. However, patients with cirrhosis especially those at low-volume centers have significantly higher risk of worse outcomes (see Visual abstract, Supplementary Digital Content, http://links.lww.com/AJG/B648)
The gut microbiome: scourge, sentinel or spectator?
The gut microbiota consists of trillions of prokaryotes that reside in the intestinal mucosa. This long-established commensalism indicates that these microbes are an integral part of the eukaryotic host. Recent research findings have implicated the dynamics of microbial function in setting thresholds for many physiological parameters. Conversely, it has been convincingly argued that dysbiosis, representing microbial imbalance, may be an important underlying factor that contributes to a variety of diseases, inside and outside the gut. This review discusses the latest findings, including enterotype classification, changes brought on by dysbiosis, gut inflammation, and metabolic mediators in an attempt to underscore the importance of the gut microbiota for human health. A cautiously optimistic idea is taking hold, invoking the gut microbiota as a medium to track, target and treat a plethora of diseases
An Outbreak Presents An Opportunity to Learn About A Rare Phenotype: Autoimmune Hepatitis After Acute Hepatitis A
There are rare instances where patients with acute hepatitis A virus infection subsequently developed autoimmune hepatitis. The diagnosis of autoimmune hepatitis in this setting is challenging. Furthermore, information on treatment with steroids or other immune suppressants, duration of therapy and possibility of treatment discontinuation is currently unclear. Here we report a case series of four patients with histology proven autoimmune hepatitis after hepatitis A virus infection. We describe the presenting features, diagnosis, treatment and long-term outcomes of these cases. This case series provides a insight into the clinical presentation and treatment of autoimmune hepatitis after hepatitis A infection with interesting take home points for clinical hepatologists