User login
Redefine dysplastic nevi to stratify cancer risk
WAILEA, HAWAII – It is time for a new system of classifying nevi, according to Ashfaq Marghoob, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.
“It was known for the last 30 or 40 years that we do need to subclassify nevi into groups, so as to better stratify for melanoma risk,” identifying groups of individuals who would benefit most from targeted screening, Dr. Marghoob said in a video interview at the meeting, provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. But it has been clear that there are many flaws in the current classification system, he added.
This is beginning to change as new data emerge about gene mutations and other science that can better stratify “or segregate” the nevi into subsets, and “the hope is we will be better able to predict which subsets are associated with melanoma risk either within the lesion itself or poses an increased risk to the patient,” he explained.
“As our understanding grows, we will start to come out with subsets of nevi that have a certain clinical and dermoscopic morphology,” to help predict which patients would benefit most from being monitored very closely, with the aim of detecting – and curing – melanomas early, said Dr. Marghoob, director of Memorial Sloan Kettering’s regional skin cancer clinic in Hauppauge, N.Y.
He had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent organization.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – It is time for a new system of classifying nevi, according to Ashfaq Marghoob, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.
“It was known for the last 30 or 40 years that we do need to subclassify nevi into groups, so as to better stratify for melanoma risk,” identifying groups of individuals who would benefit most from targeted screening, Dr. Marghoob said in a video interview at the meeting, provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. But it has been clear that there are many flaws in the current classification system, he added.
This is beginning to change as new data emerge about gene mutations and other science that can better stratify “or segregate” the nevi into subsets, and “the hope is we will be better able to predict which subsets are associated with melanoma risk either within the lesion itself or poses an increased risk to the patient,” he explained.
“As our understanding grows, we will start to come out with subsets of nevi that have a certain clinical and dermoscopic morphology,” to help predict which patients would benefit most from being monitored very closely, with the aim of detecting – and curing – melanomas early, said Dr. Marghoob, director of Memorial Sloan Kettering’s regional skin cancer clinic in Hauppauge, N.Y.
He had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent organization.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – It is time for a new system of classifying nevi, according to Ashfaq Marghoob, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.
“It was known for the last 30 or 40 years that we do need to subclassify nevi into groups, so as to better stratify for melanoma risk,” identifying groups of individuals who would benefit most from targeted screening, Dr. Marghoob said in a video interview at the meeting, provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. But it has been clear that there are many flaws in the current classification system, he added.
This is beginning to change as new data emerge about gene mutations and other science that can better stratify “or segregate” the nevi into subsets, and “the hope is we will be better able to predict which subsets are associated with melanoma risk either within the lesion itself or poses an increased risk to the patient,” he explained.
“As our understanding grows, we will start to come out with subsets of nevi that have a certain clinical and dermoscopic morphology,” to help predict which patients would benefit most from being monitored very closely, with the aim of detecting – and curing – melanomas early, said Dr. Marghoob, director of Memorial Sloan Kettering’s regional skin cancer clinic in Hauppauge, N.Y.
He had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent organization.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
AT SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR
VIDEO: Advances in noninvasive fat reduction include permanent effects
WAILEA, HAWAII – In the past few years, there have been “exciting” advances in noninvasive techniques to permanently remove fat, according to Suzanne Kilmer, MD, of the department of dermatology, University of California, Davis.
There are devices now available to reduce fat “in a permanent way that’s not injurious, it’s not uncomfortable – patients love it,” Dr. Kilmer said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
Currently, the three noninvasive modalities she considers most effective for reducing fat are cryolipolysis, the 1,060-nm laser, and focused pulsed ultrasound. In the interview, she discussed the ways these treatments work and their safety.
With all three, “the fat that goes away stays away,” said Dr. Kilmer, who is director of the Laser and Skin Surgery Center of Northern California, Sacramento. Treatment results in release of fat, which is “cleared like it is as if you ate a cheeseburger,” she added. Interestingly, she said, trials that have looked at whether the fat reduction is accompanied by weight loss have found that, in most cases, the patient’s weight remains stable.
Dr. Kilmer’s disclosures included serving as a consultant and/or researcher for Allergan, Cutera, Cynosure, Cytrellis, Kythera, Lumenis, Merz, Miramar, Sebacia, Sienna Labs, Solta, Zeltiq, and Zift.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – In the past few years, there have been “exciting” advances in noninvasive techniques to permanently remove fat, according to Suzanne Kilmer, MD, of the department of dermatology, University of California, Davis.
There are devices now available to reduce fat “in a permanent way that’s not injurious, it’s not uncomfortable – patients love it,” Dr. Kilmer said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
Currently, the three noninvasive modalities she considers most effective for reducing fat are cryolipolysis, the 1,060-nm laser, and focused pulsed ultrasound. In the interview, she discussed the ways these treatments work and their safety.
With all three, “the fat that goes away stays away,” said Dr. Kilmer, who is director of the Laser and Skin Surgery Center of Northern California, Sacramento. Treatment results in release of fat, which is “cleared like it is as if you ate a cheeseburger,” she added. Interestingly, she said, trials that have looked at whether the fat reduction is accompanied by weight loss have found that, in most cases, the patient’s weight remains stable.
Dr. Kilmer’s disclosures included serving as a consultant and/or researcher for Allergan, Cutera, Cynosure, Cytrellis, Kythera, Lumenis, Merz, Miramar, Sebacia, Sienna Labs, Solta, Zeltiq, and Zift.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – In the past few years, there have been “exciting” advances in noninvasive techniques to permanently remove fat, according to Suzanne Kilmer, MD, of the department of dermatology, University of California, Davis.
There are devices now available to reduce fat “in a permanent way that’s not injurious, it’s not uncomfortable – patients love it,” Dr. Kilmer said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
Currently, the three noninvasive modalities she considers most effective for reducing fat are cryolipolysis, the 1,060-nm laser, and focused pulsed ultrasound. In the interview, she discussed the ways these treatments work and their safety.
With all three, “the fat that goes away stays away,” said Dr. Kilmer, who is director of the Laser and Skin Surgery Center of Northern California, Sacramento. Treatment results in release of fat, which is “cleared like it is as if you ate a cheeseburger,” she added. Interestingly, she said, trials that have looked at whether the fat reduction is accompanied by weight loss have found that, in most cases, the patient’s weight remains stable.
Dr. Kilmer’s disclosures included serving as a consultant and/or researcher for Allergan, Cutera, Cynosure, Cytrellis, Kythera, Lumenis, Merz, Miramar, Sebacia, Sienna Labs, Solta, Zeltiq, and Zift.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
VIDEO: Infectious enteritis quadrupled short-term risk of IBS
More than 10% of patients developed irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) within a year after infectious enteritis, which gave them a more than fourfold greater risk than that of controls, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis of 45 studies.
“Protozoal and bacterial enteritis confer the greatest overall risk, although the magnitude of increased risk diminishes with time since exposure,” Fabiane B. Klem, MD, and Akhilesh Wadhwa, MD, of Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and their associates wrote in the April issue of Gastroenterology. Other significant risk factors for postinfectious IBS (PI-IBS) included female sex, clinically severe infections, antibiotic therapy, and comorbid psychological distress, they said.
Postinfectious IBS can last at least a decade after resolution of campylobacteriosis, shigellosis, salmonellosis, giardiasis, and norovirus infections, even when patients have no other risk factors for IBS, the researchers noted. To update and expand the most recent meta-analysis of this topic (Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007;26:535-44), the investigators searched Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for studies published from 2006 through Aug. 31, 2015. This search yielded 45 studies, including 30 studies comparing infected patients with controls, who were usually matched by age, sex, and geographic location (Gastroenterology. 2017 Jan 6. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.12.039).
In all, 10.1% of patients with infectious enteritis developed IBS in the next 12 months (95% confidence interval, 7.2-14.1) – a 4.2-fold increase in risk, compared with that of controls (risk ratio, 4.2; 95% CI, 3.2-5.7). This risk subsequently dropped, but remained significantly elevated (RR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.8-3.0), compared with controls. “Of patients with enteritis caused by protozoa or parasites, 41.9% developed IBS; of patients with enteritis caused by bacterial infection, 13.8% developed IBS,” the researchers emphasized. Patients with these infections remained at elevated risk of PI-IBS even after 1 year. Viral enteritis also significantly increased the risk of PI-IBS, but risk dropped to baseline levels after a year.
Among 10 pooled studies of IBS subtypes, 46% of patients had mixed IBS, 39% had diarrhea-predominant IBS, and 15% had constipation-predominant IBS. Female sex doubled the odds of PI-IBS (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.6-3.1) in 11 pooled studies. Significant clinical risk factors for PI-IBS included diarrhea lasting more than 7 days (eight studies; OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.6), bloody stool (four studies; OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0), and antibiotic therapy during infectious enteritis (seven studies; OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.4).
Multiple reports linked PI-IBS to clinical psychological distress at the time of infectious enteritis. Specific risk factors included depression based on the Hospitalization Anxiety and Depression Scale (five studies; OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9), anxiety based on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (four studies; OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3-2.9), somatization (four studies; OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 2.7-6.0), and neuroticism (two studies; OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.6-6.6). Isolated studies also implicated hypochondriasis, extroversion, negative illness beliefs, stress, sleep disturbance, and adverse life events in the preceding year, the researchers said.
They found no evidence of publication bias, but noted a substantial amount of heterogeneity among studies. Also, some studies did not report multivariate analyses, so individual odds ratios might reflect “a conglomeration of factors,” they said.
The National Institutes of Health and the American Gastroenterological Association funded the work. The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest.
Source: American Gastroenterological Association
The phenomenon of IBS developing after a bout of gastroenteritis (postinfectious [PI]–IBS) was first reported in 1950 and subsequently elaborated by studies from Oxford (Q J Med. 1962;123:307-22), Sheffield (Gut. 1999;44:400-6), and Nottingham (BMJ 1997;314:779-82; Gut. 2000;47:804-11). It has proven to be a fertile area for research, which is the basis for this excellent meta-analysis.
The authors identified 45 studies, 29 in the last decade including a total of 21,421 participants with exposure to gastroenteritis. The pooled prevalence for PI-IBS was 11.5% (95% CI, 8.2%-15.8%) but with considerable heterogeneity, which the authors attempted to explain by a number of subgroup analyses. The authors report that protozoal infection seems to have a higher rate of PI-IBS than bacterial or viral infection, though some caution is warranted, since these figures rely on reports from just one outbreak of giardiasis in Bergen, Norway (Scand J Gastroenterol. 2012;47:956-61). However, if true, this might suggest that a different immune response could be responsible, a feature which others have suggested might predispose particular individuals to PI-IBS (Gut. 2016;65[8]1279-88).
The meta-analysis confirms the consistent increased risk in female patients (odds ratio, 1.69), anxiety (OR, 1.97), and somatization (greatest RR, 4.05), all common risks for the development of IBS but not specific to PI-IBS. Initial disease severity indicators, including bloody stool and more than 7 days of initial illness, which might indicate the severity of underlying damage to the gut, were shown to be significant risk factors. Animal studies of acute infection, particularly parasitic infestation, indicate that significant changes can be seen in both nerve and muscle, but routine histology in PI-IBS patients is normal. Infection produces a striking increase in gut permeability (Gut 2000;47:804-11), a feature of IBS whose molecular basis has been demonstrated by a series of elegant studies (Gut. 2017 Jan 12 [Epub ahead of print]; Gut. 2015;64:1379-88) demonstrating altered tight junctions and immune activation in IBS with diarrhea. The authors found treatment with antibiotics increased the risk of PI-IBS but whether this is attributable to confounding by indication is unclear.
This meta-analysis indicates that PI-IBS also potentially is the most common cause of IBS, given that both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States and community surveys in the United Kingdom (BMJ. 1999;318:1046-50) indicate that gastroenteritis affects around 1 in 5 of the population each year. If the incidence of PI-IBS is around 10%, modeling suggests PI-IBS could account for the majority of new cases (J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2012;18:200-4).
Dr. Robin Spiller is professor of gastroenterology, NIHR Nottingham Digestive Diseases Biomedical Research Unit, Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre, University of Nottingham, England. He has no relevant conflicts of interest.
The phenomenon of IBS developing after a bout of gastroenteritis (postinfectious [PI]–IBS) was first reported in 1950 and subsequently elaborated by studies from Oxford (Q J Med. 1962;123:307-22), Sheffield (Gut. 1999;44:400-6), and Nottingham (BMJ 1997;314:779-82; Gut. 2000;47:804-11). It has proven to be a fertile area for research, which is the basis for this excellent meta-analysis.
The authors identified 45 studies, 29 in the last decade including a total of 21,421 participants with exposure to gastroenteritis. The pooled prevalence for PI-IBS was 11.5% (95% CI, 8.2%-15.8%) but with considerable heterogeneity, which the authors attempted to explain by a number of subgroup analyses. The authors report that protozoal infection seems to have a higher rate of PI-IBS than bacterial or viral infection, though some caution is warranted, since these figures rely on reports from just one outbreak of giardiasis in Bergen, Norway (Scand J Gastroenterol. 2012;47:956-61). However, if true, this might suggest that a different immune response could be responsible, a feature which others have suggested might predispose particular individuals to PI-IBS (Gut. 2016;65[8]1279-88).
The meta-analysis confirms the consistent increased risk in female patients (odds ratio, 1.69), anxiety (OR, 1.97), and somatization (greatest RR, 4.05), all common risks for the development of IBS but not specific to PI-IBS. Initial disease severity indicators, including bloody stool and more than 7 days of initial illness, which might indicate the severity of underlying damage to the gut, were shown to be significant risk factors. Animal studies of acute infection, particularly parasitic infestation, indicate that significant changes can be seen in both nerve and muscle, but routine histology in PI-IBS patients is normal. Infection produces a striking increase in gut permeability (Gut 2000;47:804-11), a feature of IBS whose molecular basis has been demonstrated by a series of elegant studies (Gut. 2017 Jan 12 [Epub ahead of print]; Gut. 2015;64:1379-88) demonstrating altered tight junctions and immune activation in IBS with diarrhea. The authors found treatment with antibiotics increased the risk of PI-IBS but whether this is attributable to confounding by indication is unclear.
This meta-analysis indicates that PI-IBS also potentially is the most common cause of IBS, given that both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States and community surveys in the United Kingdom (BMJ. 1999;318:1046-50) indicate that gastroenteritis affects around 1 in 5 of the population each year. If the incidence of PI-IBS is around 10%, modeling suggests PI-IBS could account for the majority of new cases (J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2012;18:200-4).
Dr. Robin Spiller is professor of gastroenterology, NIHR Nottingham Digestive Diseases Biomedical Research Unit, Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre, University of Nottingham, England. He has no relevant conflicts of interest.
The phenomenon of IBS developing after a bout of gastroenteritis (postinfectious [PI]–IBS) was first reported in 1950 and subsequently elaborated by studies from Oxford (Q J Med. 1962;123:307-22), Sheffield (Gut. 1999;44:400-6), and Nottingham (BMJ 1997;314:779-82; Gut. 2000;47:804-11). It has proven to be a fertile area for research, which is the basis for this excellent meta-analysis.
The authors identified 45 studies, 29 in the last decade including a total of 21,421 participants with exposure to gastroenteritis. The pooled prevalence for PI-IBS was 11.5% (95% CI, 8.2%-15.8%) but with considerable heterogeneity, which the authors attempted to explain by a number of subgroup analyses. The authors report that protozoal infection seems to have a higher rate of PI-IBS than bacterial or viral infection, though some caution is warranted, since these figures rely on reports from just one outbreak of giardiasis in Bergen, Norway (Scand J Gastroenterol. 2012;47:956-61). However, if true, this might suggest that a different immune response could be responsible, a feature which others have suggested might predispose particular individuals to PI-IBS (Gut. 2016;65[8]1279-88).
The meta-analysis confirms the consistent increased risk in female patients (odds ratio, 1.69), anxiety (OR, 1.97), and somatization (greatest RR, 4.05), all common risks for the development of IBS but not specific to PI-IBS. Initial disease severity indicators, including bloody stool and more than 7 days of initial illness, which might indicate the severity of underlying damage to the gut, were shown to be significant risk factors. Animal studies of acute infection, particularly parasitic infestation, indicate that significant changes can be seen in both nerve and muscle, but routine histology in PI-IBS patients is normal. Infection produces a striking increase in gut permeability (Gut 2000;47:804-11), a feature of IBS whose molecular basis has been demonstrated by a series of elegant studies (Gut. 2017 Jan 12 [Epub ahead of print]; Gut. 2015;64:1379-88) demonstrating altered tight junctions and immune activation in IBS with diarrhea. The authors found treatment with antibiotics increased the risk of PI-IBS but whether this is attributable to confounding by indication is unclear.
This meta-analysis indicates that PI-IBS also potentially is the most common cause of IBS, given that both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States and community surveys in the United Kingdom (BMJ. 1999;318:1046-50) indicate that gastroenteritis affects around 1 in 5 of the population each year. If the incidence of PI-IBS is around 10%, modeling suggests PI-IBS could account for the majority of new cases (J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2012;18:200-4).
Dr. Robin Spiller is professor of gastroenterology, NIHR Nottingham Digestive Diseases Biomedical Research Unit, Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre, University of Nottingham, England. He has no relevant conflicts of interest.
More than 10% of patients developed irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) within a year after infectious enteritis, which gave them a more than fourfold greater risk than that of controls, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis of 45 studies.
“Protozoal and bacterial enteritis confer the greatest overall risk, although the magnitude of increased risk diminishes with time since exposure,” Fabiane B. Klem, MD, and Akhilesh Wadhwa, MD, of Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and their associates wrote in the April issue of Gastroenterology. Other significant risk factors for postinfectious IBS (PI-IBS) included female sex, clinically severe infections, antibiotic therapy, and comorbid psychological distress, they said.
Postinfectious IBS can last at least a decade after resolution of campylobacteriosis, shigellosis, salmonellosis, giardiasis, and norovirus infections, even when patients have no other risk factors for IBS, the researchers noted. To update and expand the most recent meta-analysis of this topic (Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007;26:535-44), the investigators searched Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for studies published from 2006 through Aug. 31, 2015. This search yielded 45 studies, including 30 studies comparing infected patients with controls, who were usually matched by age, sex, and geographic location (Gastroenterology. 2017 Jan 6. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.12.039).
In all, 10.1% of patients with infectious enteritis developed IBS in the next 12 months (95% confidence interval, 7.2-14.1) – a 4.2-fold increase in risk, compared with that of controls (risk ratio, 4.2; 95% CI, 3.2-5.7). This risk subsequently dropped, but remained significantly elevated (RR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.8-3.0), compared with controls. “Of patients with enteritis caused by protozoa or parasites, 41.9% developed IBS; of patients with enteritis caused by bacterial infection, 13.8% developed IBS,” the researchers emphasized. Patients with these infections remained at elevated risk of PI-IBS even after 1 year. Viral enteritis also significantly increased the risk of PI-IBS, but risk dropped to baseline levels after a year.
Among 10 pooled studies of IBS subtypes, 46% of patients had mixed IBS, 39% had diarrhea-predominant IBS, and 15% had constipation-predominant IBS. Female sex doubled the odds of PI-IBS (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.6-3.1) in 11 pooled studies. Significant clinical risk factors for PI-IBS included diarrhea lasting more than 7 days (eight studies; OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.6), bloody stool (four studies; OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0), and antibiotic therapy during infectious enteritis (seven studies; OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.4).
Multiple reports linked PI-IBS to clinical psychological distress at the time of infectious enteritis. Specific risk factors included depression based on the Hospitalization Anxiety and Depression Scale (five studies; OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9), anxiety based on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (four studies; OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3-2.9), somatization (four studies; OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 2.7-6.0), and neuroticism (two studies; OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.6-6.6). Isolated studies also implicated hypochondriasis, extroversion, negative illness beliefs, stress, sleep disturbance, and adverse life events in the preceding year, the researchers said.
They found no evidence of publication bias, but noted a substantial amount of heterogeneity among studies. Also, some studies did not report multivariate analyses, so individual odds ratios might reflect “a conglomeration of factors,” they said.
The National Institutes of Health and the American Gastroenterological Association funded the work. The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest.
Source: American Gastroenterological Association
More than 10% of patients developed irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) within a year after infectious enteritis, which gave them a more than fourfold greater risk than that of controls, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis of 45 studies.
“Protozoal and bacterial enteritis confer the greatest overall risk, although the magnitude of increased risk diminishes with time since exposure,” Fabiane B. Klem, MD, and Akhilesh Wadhwa, MD, of Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and their associates wrote in the April issue of Gastroenterology. Other significant risk factors for postinfectious IBS (PI-IBS) included female sex, clinically severe infections, antibiotic therapy, and comorbid psychological distress, they said.
Postinfectious IBS can last at least a decade after resolution of campylobacteriosis, shigellosis, salmonellosis, giardiasis, and norovirus infections, even when patients have no other risk factors for IBS, the researchers noted. To update and expand the most recent meta-analysis of this topic (Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007;26:535-44), the investigators searched Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for studies published from 2006 through Aug. 31, 2015. This search yielded 45 studies, including 30 studies comparing infected patients with controls, who were usually matched by age, sex, and geographic location (Gastroenterology. 2017 Jan 6. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.12.039).
In all, 10.1% of patients with infectious enteritis developed IBS in the next 12 months (95% confidence interval, 7.2-14.1) – a 4.2-fold increase in risk, compared with that of controls (risk ratio, 4.2; 95% CI, 3.2-5.7). This risk subsequently dropped, but remained significantly elevated (RR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.8-3.0), compared with controls. “Of patients with enteritis caused by protozoa or parasites, 41.9% developed IBS; of patients with enteritis caused by bacterial infection, 13.8% developed IBS,” the researchers emphasized. Patients with these infections remained at elevated risk of PI-IBS even after 1 year. Viral enteritis also significantly increased the risk of PI-IBS, but risk dropped to baseline levels after a year.
Among 10 pooled studies of IBS subtypes, 46% of patients had mixed IBS, 39% had diarrhea-predominant IBS, and 15% had constipation-predominant IBS. Female sex doubled the odds of PI-IBS (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.6-3.1) in 11 pooled studies. Significant clinical risk factors for PI-IBS included diarrhea lasting more than 7 days (eight studies; OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.6), bloody stool (four studies; OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0), and antibiotic therapy during infectious enteritis (seven studies; OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.4).
Multiple reports linked PI-IBS to clinical psychological distress at the time of infectious enteritis. Specific risk factors included depression based on the Hospitalization Anxiety and Depression Scale (five studies; OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9), anxiety based on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (four studies; OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3-2.9), somatization (four studies; OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 2.7-6.0), and neuroticism (two studies; OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.6-6.6). Isolated studies also implicated hypochondriasis, extroversion, negative illness beliefs, stress, sleep disturbance, and adverse life events in the preceding year, the researchers said.
They found no evidence of publication bias, but noted a substantial amount of heterogeneity among studies. Also, some studies did not report multivariate analyses, so individual odds ratios might reflect “a conglomeration of factors,” they said.
The National Institutes of Health and the American Gastroenterological Association funded the work. The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest.
Source: American Gastroenterological Association
FROM GASTROENTEROLOGY
Key clinical point.
Major finding: A total of 10.1% of patients with infectious enteritis developed IBS in the next 12 months, a 4.2-fold increase in risk, compared with that of controls.
Data source: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 45 studies.
Disclosures: The National Institutes of Health and the American Gastroenterological Association funded the work. The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest.
VIDEO: Clot aspiration equals retrieval for ischemic stroke
HOUSTON – Intracerebral clot aspiration was as safe and effective as stent retriever thrombectomy for restoring cerebral blood flow in a French multicenter, randomized trial with 381 acute ischemic stroke patients.
This study is the “first direct comparison of aspiration versus stent retrieval” as the initial strategy for clot removal in acute ischemic stroke, and it “opens the door to add a new tool” for clot removal, Bertrand Lapergue, MD, said at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
The new results “are the first to show that aspiration first is as good as a stent retriever, but we need to also see the results from COMPASS,” a U.S. multicenter trial that is in the process of making the same comparison, commented Ricardo A. Hanel, MD, a vascular neurosurgeon at Baptist Health in Jacksonville, Fla. The COMPASS Trial: a Direct Aspiration First Pass Technique has now enrolled about two-thirds of its target patient number, and until the study is complete the role of direct aspiration for clot removal in stroke remains investigational for U.S. practice, said Dr. Hanel, a COMPASS investigator.
The aspiration catheter tested in ASTER is marketed by Penumbra and has already received Food and Drug Administration approval for revascularization of ischemic stroke patients. U.S. use of aspiration for treating acute ischemic stroke, however, has remained limited because there is no clear evidence of the method’s efficacy. Dr. Hanel said that he occasionally uses aspiration as an adjunct to clot removal with a stent retriever.
ASTER’s primary endpoint was the percentage of patients who achieved thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (TICI) 2b or 3 flow at the end of treatment, which occurred in 85% of patients treated with aspiration first and in 83% of those treated by clot removal first, a difference that was not statistically significant, Dr. Lapergue reported. The rate of patients who achieved either TICI 2b or 3 flow after the initial strategy only was 63% with aspiration and 68% with clot removal, also a nonsignificant difference. The two strategies also showed no significant difference for any measured safety parameter. The results showed a trend toward more vasospasm with clot removal – a 6% rate, versus 3% with clot aspiration – but this did not reach statistical significance.
Results from additional analyses of the clinical outcomes of patients in the trial and of cost efficacy will be reported later in 2017, Dr. Lapergue said.
ASTER received an unrestricted research grant from Penumbra, a company that markets clot removal aspiration catheters. Dr. Lapergue had no personal disclosures. Dr. Hanel has been a consultant to and received grant support from Medtronic. He has received research grants from MicroVention and has an ownership interest in InNeuroCo.
mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
ASTER is an important trial. It shows for the first time that an aspiration device is probably as safe and reasonable for opening an acute occlusion in a large cerebral artery as is a stent retriever.
ASTER, however, was done entirely in a French population, making it uncertain whether the results are applicable to other populations. For example, U.S. acute ischemic stroke patients, especially African Americans and Hispanics, generally have more intracerebral atherostenotic disease than do patients from European countries, while French patients tend to have more embolic disease. Will aspiration be as effective in U.S. patients with atherostenotic blockages? I would love to see this study repeated in a U.S. population of ischemic stroke patients, and that is now happening in the COMPASS trial. It would be helpful to know if there are selected U.S. patients who might be better treated using either aspiration or a stent retriever first.
Although aspiration catheters have already received Food and Drug Administration approval for clot removal in acute ischemic stroke patients, many U.S. interventionalists have moved to deploying stent retrievers based on the very positive results reported with these devices about 2 years ago. For the moment, stent retrievers remain the most prominent devices to open large vessel occlusions.
Ralph L. Sacco, MD, is professor and chairman of neurology at the University of Miami. He had no relevant disclosures. He made these comments in a video interview and during a press conference.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
ASTER is an important trial. It shows for the first time that an aspiration device is probably as safe and reasonable for opening an acute occlusion in a large cerebral artery as is a stent retriever.
ASTER, however, was done entirely in a French population, making it uncertain whether the results are applicable to other populations. For example, U.S. acute ischemic stroke patients, especially African Americans and Hispanics, generally have more intracerebral atherostenotic disease than do patients from European countries, while French patients tend to have more embolic disease. Will aspiration be as effective in U.S. patients with atherostenotic blockages? I would love to see this study repeated in a U.S. population of ischemic stroke patients, and that is now happening in the COMPASS trial. It would be helpful to know if there are selected U.S. patients who might be better treated using either aspiration or a stent retriever first.
Although aspiration catheters have already received Food and Drug Administration approval for clot removal in acute ischemic stroke patients, many U.S. interventionalists have moved to deploying stent retrievers based on the very positive results reported with these devices about 2 years ago. For the moment, stent retrievers remain the most prominent devices to open large vessel occlusions.
Ralph L. Sacco, MD, is professor and chairman of neurology at the University of Miami. He had no relevant disclosures. He made these comments in a video interview and during a press conference.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
ASTER is an important trial. It shows for the first time that an aspiration device is probably as safe and reasonable for opening an acute occlusion in a large cerebral artery as is a stent retriever.
ASTER, however, was done entirely in a French population, making it uncertain whether the results are applicable to other populations. For example, U.S. acute ischemic stroke patients, especially African Americans and Hispanics, generally have more intracerebral atherostenotic disease than do patients from European countries, while French patients tend to have more embolic disease. Will aspiration be as effective in U.S. patients with atherostenotic blockages? I would love to see this study repeated in a U.S. population of ischemic stroke patients, and that is now happening in the COMPASS trial. It would be helpful to know if there are selected U.S. patients who might be better treated using either aspiration or a stent retriever first.
Although aspiration catheters have already received Food and Drug Administration approval for clot removal in acute ischemic stroke patients, many U.S. interventionalists have moved to deploying stent retrievers based on the very positive results reported with these devices about 2 years ago. For the moment, stent retrievers remain the most prominent devices to open large vessel occlusions.
Ralph L. Sacco, MD, is professor and chairman of neurology at the University of Miami. He had no relevant disclosures. He made these comments in a video interview and during a press conference.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
HOUSTON – Intracerebral clot aspiration was as safe and effective as stent retriever thrombectomy for restoring cerebral blood flow in a French multicenter, randomized trial with 381 acute ischemic stroke patients.
This study is the “first direct comparison of aspiration versus stent retrieval” as the initial strategy for clot removal in acute ischemic stroke, and it “opens the door to add a new tool” for clot removal, Bertrand Lapergue, MD, said at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
The new results “are the first to show that aspiration first is as good as a stent retriever, but we need to also see the results from COMPASS,” a U.S. multicenter trial that is in the process of making the same comparison, commented Ricardo A. Hanel, MD, a vascular neurosurgeon at Baptist Health in Jacksonville, Fla. The COMPASS Trial: a Direct Aspiration First Pass Technique has now enrolled about two-thirds of its target patient number, and until the study is complete the role of direct aspiration for clot removal in stroke remains investigational for U.S. practice, said Dr. Hanel, a COMPASS investigator.
The aspiration catheter tested in ASTER is marketed by Penumbra and has already received Food and Drug Administration approval for revascularization of ischemic stroke patients. U.S. use of aspiration for treating acute ischemic stroke, however, has remained limited because there is no clear evidence of the method’s efficacy. Dr. Hanel said that he occasionally uses aspiration as an adjunct to clot removal with a stent retriever.
ASTER’s primary endpoint was the percentage of patients who achieved thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (TICI) 2b or 3 flow at the end of treatment, which occurred in 85% of patients treated with aspiration first and in 83% of those treated by clot removal first, a difference that was not statistically significant, Dr. Lapergue reported. The rate of patients who achieved either TICI 2b or 3 flow after the initial strategy only was 63% with aspiration and 68% with clot removal, also a nonsignificant difference. The two strategies also showed no significant difference for any measured safety parameter. The results showed a trend toward more vasospasm with clot removal – a 6% rate, versus 3% with clot aspiration – but this did not reach statistical significance.
Results from additional analyses of the clinical outcomes of patients in the trial and of cost efficacy will be reported later in 2017, Dr. Lapergue said.
ASTER received an unrestricted research grant from Penumbra, a company that markets clot removal aspiration catheters. Dr. Lapergue had no personal disclosures. Dr. Hanel has been a consultant to and received grant support from Medtronic. He has received research grants from MicroVention and has an ownership interest in InNeuroCo.
mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
HOUSTON – Intracerebral clot aspiration was as safe and effective as stent retriever thrombectomy for restoring cerebral blood flow in a French multicenter, randomized trial with 381 acute ischemic stroke patients.
This study is the “first direct comparison of aspiration versus stent retrieval” as the initial strategy for clot removal in acute ischemic stroke, and it “opens the door to add a new tool” for clot removal, Bertrand Lapergue, MD, said at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
The new results “are the first to show that aspiration first is as good as a stent retriever, but we need to also see the results from COMPASS,” a U.S. multicenter trial that is in the process of making the same comparison, commented Ricardo A. Hanel, MD, a vascular neurosurgeon at Baptist Health in Jacksonville, Fla. The COMPASS Trial: a Direct Aspiration First Pass Technique has now enrolled about two-thirds of its target patient number, and until the study is complete the role of direct aspiration for clot removal in stroke remains investigational for U.S. practice, said Dr. Hanel, a COMPASS investigator.
The aspiration catheter tested in ASTER is marketed by Penumbra and has already received Food and Drug Administration approval for revascularization of ischemic stroke patients. U.S. use of aspiration for treating acute ischemic stroke, however, has remained limited because there is no clear evidence of the method’s efficacy. Dr. Hanel said that he occasionally uses aspiration as an adjunct to clot removal with a stent retriever.
ASTER’s primary endpoint was the percentage of patients who achieved thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (TICI) 2b or 3 flow at the end of treatment, which occurred in 85% of patients treated with aspiration first and in 83% of those treated by clot removal first, a difference that was not statistically significant, Dr. Lapergue reported. The rate of patients who achieved either TICI 2b or 3 flow after the initial strategy only was 63% with aspiration and 68% with clot removal, also a nonsignificant difference. The two strategies also showed no significant difference for any measured safety parameter. The results showed a trend toward more vasospasm with clot removal – a 6% rate, versus 3% with clot aspiration – but this did not reach statistical significance.
Results from additional analyses of the clinical outcomes of patients in the trial and of cost efficacy will be reported later in 2017, Dr. Lapergue said.
ASTER received an unrestricted research grant from Penumbra, a company that markets clot removal aspiration catheters. Dr. Lapergue had no personal disclosures. Dr. Hanel has been a consultant to and received grant support from Medtronic. He has received research grants from MicroVention and has an ownership interest in InNeuroCo.
mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
AT THE INTERNATIONAL STROKE CONFERENCE
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Recanalization occurred in 85% of patients treated with aspiration first and 83% treated with clot removal first.
Data source: ASTER, a multicenter, randomized French trial with 381 patients.
Disclosures: ASTER received an unrestricted research grant from Penumbra, a company that markets clot removal aspiration catheters. Dr. Lapergue had no personal disclosures. Dr. Hanel has been a consultant to and received grant support from Medtronic. He has received research grants from MicroVention and has an ownership interest in InNeuroCo.
VIDEO: Dual antibiotic prophylaxis cuts cesarean SSIs
LAS VEGAS – Two days of prophylaxis with two oral antibiotics cut the surgical site infection rate by more than half in a randomized trial with more than 400 obese women who had cesarean deliveries.
The protective effect from combined treatment with cephalexin and metronidazole was especially powerful in the most at-risk patients, women with ruptured membranes before cesarean surgery. In this subgroup prophylaxis with the two antibiotics for 2 days cut surgical site infections (SSIs) during the 30 days after surgery, from a rate of 33% in control women who received placebo to a 10% rate, a 77% relative risk reduction that was statistically significant, Carri R. Warshak, MD, said at the annual Pregnancy Meeting sponsored by the Society for Maternal and Fetal Medicine.
“I am very excited that we found a way to help the kinds of women in the study, very-high-risk women, with an effective way to reduce their risk of infection,” Dr. Warshak of the University of Cincinnati said in a video interview. The obese women enrolled in the study, especially those with ruptured membranes, “have a very high risk of morbidity, so it’s very exciting that we found a way to help prevent” SSIs.
“Our study is the first to target postpartum interventions to reduce SSIs specifically in this high-risk population” of obese mothers, said Amy M. Valent, DO, a maternal fetal medicine clinician at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, who ran the trial with Dr. Warshak.
The trial randomized women with a body mass index of at least 30 kg/m2 who underwent a planned or unplanned cesarean delivery at the University of Cincinnati during 2010-2015. Following standard management during cesarean delivery, the women received either 500 mg oral cephalexin and 500 mg oral metronidazole or placebo every 8 hours for 48 hours following delivery. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSIs, and randomization was stratified so that similar numbers of women with ruptured membranes got into each treatment arm. The enrolled women averaged 28 years of age, and average BMI was about 40 kg/m2. Nearly a third of the women had ruptured membranes at the time of surgery, more than a quarter of the enrolled women used tobacco, and more than a fifth had preeclampsia.
Additional analyses reported at the meeting by Dr. Valent showed that other risk factors that significantly boosted the rate of SSIs were labor prior to delivery, use of internal monitoring, and operative time of more than 90 minutes. Antibiotic prophylaxis was able to significantly reduce SSI rates in women with any of these additional risk factors, compared with placebo. A cost effectiveness analysis she ran estimated that if the antibiotic prophylaxis tested in the study were used on the roughly 460,000 obese U.S. women having cesarean deliveries annually, it would be cost saving as long as the antibiotic regimen cost no more than $357 a person. Factoring in the SSIs and long-term morbidity that prophylaxis would prevent, and the quality-adjusted life-years it would add, showed that prophylaxis would be cost-effective up to a cost of $33,557 per woman.
The prophylaxis carries a “relatively low cost and is easy to use,” Dr. Valent said.
Safety of the antibiotic combination was a question raised by Laura E. Riley, MD, director of ob.gyn. infectious disease and labor and delivery at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. “My biggest concern is 48 hours of these antibiotics,” and whether prophylaxis could be achieved with fewer doses, she said in an interview. “I’d want to minimize the dosage, and also try other, nondrug approaches to minimizing SSI risk in obese women.”
“I wouldn’t say that universally, every obstetrical program should do this, but clinicians should look at the comorbidities their mothers have and their SSI rates. There are populations out there at lower risk, but there are also populations like ours, with a SSI rate of 10%-20%,” Dr. Warshak said.
She also acknowledged that even her own obstetrical group in Cincinnati needs to now reach a consensus on an appropriate strategy for expanded cesarean-delivery prophylaxis. That’s because a 2016 report from a large, randomized trial documented another successful strategy for limiting infections following cesarean delivery: a preoperative intravenous dose of azithromycin as a supplement to standard cefazolin. The Cesarean Section Optimal Antibiotic Prophylaxis (C/SOAP) trial, done in women with any BMI but specifically nonelective cesarean deliveries, showed a significant reduction in the combined rate of SSIs, endometritis, or any other infection during 6 weeks of follow-up among women who received azithromycin on top of standard prophylaxis (N Engl J Med. 2016 Sept 29;375[13]:1231-41).
“The bottom line is that, a couple of grams of cefazolin [administered before the incision] isn’t enough, especially for women with risk factors for infection. We see infection rates of more than 10% because cefazolin alone is simply inadequate. The results from both our study and the 2016 study show we can do better to reduce morbidity,” said Dr. Warshak.
“In high-risk women, such as those who are obese, we probably need to expand the spectrum and duration of prophylaxis,” agreed Dr. Main. “Obesity is one high-risk group, but there are others.”
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
LAS VEGAS – Two days of prophylaxis with two oral antibiotics cut the surgical site infection rate by more than half in a randomized trial with more than 400 obese women who had cesarean deliveries.
The protective effect from combined treatment with cephalexin and metronidazole was especially powerful in the most at-risk patients, women with ruptured membranes before cesarean surgery. In this subgroup prophylaxis with the two antibiotics for 2 days cut surgical site infections (SSIs) during the 30 days after surgery, from a rate of 33% in control women who received placebo to a 10% rate, a 77% relative risk reduction that was statistically significant, Carri R. Warshak, MD, said at the annual Pregnancy Meeting sponsored by the Society for Maternal and Fetal Medicine.
“I am very excited that we found a way to help the kinds of women in the study, very-high-risk women, with an effective way to reduce their risk of infection,” Dr. Warshak of the University of Cincinnati said in a video interview. The obese women enrolled in the study, especially those with ruptured membranes, “have a very high risk of morbidity, so it’s very exciting that we found a way to help prevent” SSIs.
“Our study is the first to target postpartum interventions to reduce SSIs specifically in this high-risk population” of obese mothers, said Amy M. Valent, DO, a maternal fetal medicine clinician at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, who ran the trial with Dr. Warshak.
The trial randomized women with a body mass index of at least 30 kg/m2 who underwent a planned or unplanned cesarean delivery at the University of Cincinnati during 2010-2015. Following standard management during cesarean delivery, the women received either 500 mg oral cephalexin and 500 mg oral metronidazole or placebo every 8 hours for 48 hours following delivery. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSIs, and randomization was stratified so that similar numbers of women with ruptured membranes got into each treatment arm. The enrolled women averaged 28 years of age, and average BMI was about 40 kg/m2. Nearly a third of the women had ruptured membranes at the time of surgery, more than a quarter of the enrolled women used tobacco, and more than a fifth had preeclampsia.
Additional analyses reported at the meeting by Dr. Valent showed that other risk factors that significantly boosted the rate of SSIs were labor prior to delivery, use of internal monitoring, and operative time of more than 90 minutes. Antibiotic prophylaxis was able to significantly reduce SSI rates in women with any of these additional risk factors, compared with placebo. A cost effectiveness analysis she ran estimated that if the antibiotic prophylaxis tested in the study were used on the roughly 460,000 obese U.S. women having cesarean deliveries annually, it would be cost saving as long as the antibiotic regimen cost no more than $357 a person. Factoring in the SSIs and long-term morbidity that prophylaxis would prevent, and the quality-adjusted life-years it would add, showed that prophylaxis would be cost-effective up to a cost of $33,557 per woman.
The prophylaxis carries a “relatively low cost and is easy to use,” Dr. Valent said.
Safety of the antibiotic combination was a question raised by Laura E. Riley, MD, director of ob.gyn. infectious disease and labor and delivery at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. “My biggest concern is 48 hours of these antibiotics,” and whether prophylaxis could be achieved with fewer doses, she said in an interview. “I’d want to minimize the dosage, and also try other, nondrug approaches to minimizing SSI risk in obese women.”
“I wouldn’t say that universally, every obstetrical program should do this, but clinicians should look at the comorbidities their mothers have and their SSI rates. There are populations out there at lower risk, but there are also populations like ours, with a SSI rate of 10%-20%,” Dr. Warshak said.
She also acknowledged that even her own obstetrical group in Cincinnati needs to now reach a consensus on an appropriate strategy for expanded cesarean-delivery prophylaxis. That’s because a 2016 report from a large, randomized trial documented another successful strategy for limiting infections following cesarean delivery: a preoperative intravenous dose of azithromycin as a supplement to standard cefazolin. The Cesarean Section Optimal Antibiotic Prophylaxis (C/SOAP) trial, done in women with any BMI but specifically nonelective cesarean deliveries, showed a significant reduction in the combined rate of SSIs, endometritis, or any other infection during 6 weeks of follow-up among women who received azithromycin on top of standard prophylaxis (N Engl J Med. 2016 Sept 29;375[13]:1231-41).
“The bottom line is that, a couple of grams of cefazolin [administered before the incision] isn’t enough, especially for women with risk factors for infection. We see infection rates of more than 10% because cefazolin alone is simply inadequate. The results from both our study and the 2016 study show we can do better to reduce morbidity,” said Dr. Warshak.
“In high-risk women, such as those who are obese, we probably need to expand the spectrum and duration of prophylaxis,” agreed Dr. Main. “Obesity is one high-risk group, but there are others.”
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
LAS VEGAS – Two days of prophylaxis with two oral antibiotics cut the surgical site infection rate by more than half in a randomized trial with more than 400 obese women who had cesarean deliveries.
The protective effect from combined treatment with cephalexin and metronidazole was especially powerful in the most at-risk patients, women with ruptured membranes before cesarean surgery. In this subgroup prophylaxis with the two antibiotics for 2 days cut surgical site infections (SSIs) during the 30 days after surgery, from a rate of 33% in control women who received placebo to a 10% rate, a 77% relative risk reduction that was statistically significant, Carri R. Warshak, MD, said at the annual Pregnancy Meeting sponsored by the Society for Maternal and Fetal Medicine.
“I am very excited that we found a way to help the kinds of women in the study, very-high-risk women, with an effective way to reduce their risk of infection,” Dr. Warshak of the University of Cincinnati said in a video interview. The obese women enrolled in the study, especially those with ruptured membranes, “have a very high risk of morbidity, so it’s very exciting that we found a way to help prevent” SSIs.
“Our study is the first to target postpartum interventions to reduce SSIs specifically in this high-risk population” of obese mothers, said Amy M. Valent, DO, a maternal fetal medicine clinician at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, who ran the trial with Dr. Warshak.
The trial randomized women with a body mass index of at least 30 kg/m2 who underwent a planned or unplanned cesarean delivery at the University of Cincinnati during 2010-2015. Following standard management during cesarean delivery, the women received either 500 mg oral cephalexin and 500 mg oral metronidazole or placebo every 8 hours for 48 hours following delivery. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSIs, and randomization was stratified so that similar numbers of women with ruptured membranes got into each treatment arm. The enrolled women averaged 28 years of age, and average BMI was about 40 kg/m2. Nearly a third of the women had ruptured membranes at the time of surgery, more than a quarter of the enrolled women used tobacco, and more than a fifth had preeclampsia.
Additional analyses reported at the meeting by Dr. Valent showed that other risk factors that significantly boosted the rate of SSIs were labor prior to delivery, use of internal monitoring, and operative time of more than 90 minutes. Antibiotic prophylaxis was able to significantly reduce SSI rates in women with any of these additional risk factors, compared with placebo. A cost effectiveness analysis she ran estimated that if the antibiotic prophylaxis tested in the study were used on the roughly 460,000 obese U.S. women having cesarean deliveries annually, it would be cost saving as long as the antibiotic regimen cost no more than $357 a person. Factoring in the SSIs and long-term morbidity that prophylaxis would prevent, and the quality-adjusted life-years it would add, showed that prophylaxis would be cost-effective up to a cost of $33,557 per woman.
The prophylaxis carries a “relatively low cost and is easy to use,” Dr. Valent said.
Safety of the antibiotic combination was a question raised by Laura E. Riley, MD, director of ob.gyn. infectious disease and labor and delivery at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. “My biggest concern is 48 hours of these antibiotics,” and whether prophylaxis could be achieved with fewer doses, she said in an interview. “I’d want to minimize the dosage, and also try other, nondrug approaches to minimizing SSI risk in obese women.”
“I wouldn’t say that universally, every obstetrical program should do this, but clinicians should look at the comorbidities their mothers have and their SSI rates. There are populations out there at lower risk, but there are also populations like ours, with a SSI rate of 10%-20%,” Dr. Warshak said.
She also acknowledged that even her own obstetrical group in Cincinnati needs to now reach a consensus on an appropriate strategy for expanded cesarean-delivery prophylaxis. That’s because a 2016 report from a large, randomized trial documented another successful strategy for limiting infections following cesarean delivery: a preoperative intravenous dose of azithromycin as a supplement to standard cefazolin. The Cesarean Section Optimal Antibiotic Prophylaxis (C/SOAP) trial, done in women with any BMI but specifically nonelective cesarean deliveries, showed a significant reduction in the combined rate of SSIs, endometritis, or any other infection during 6 weeks of follow-up among women who received azithromycin on top of standard prophylaxis (N Engl J Med. 2016 Sept 29;375[13]:1231-41).
“The bottom line is that, a couple of grams of cefazolin [administered before the incision] isn’t enough, especially for women with risk factors for infection. We see infection rates of more than 10% because cefazolin alone is simply inadequate. The results from both our study and the 2016 study show we can do better to reduce morbidity,” said Dr. Warshak.
“In high-risk women, such as those who are obese, we probably need to expand the spectrum and duration of prophylaxis,” agreed Dr. Main. “Obesity is one high-risk group, but there are others.”
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
AT THE PREGNANCY MEETING
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Surgical site infections occurred in 7% of women who received oral prophylaxis and 16% of controls during 30-day follow-up.
Data source: A single-center randomized trial with 382 evaluable women.
Disclosures: Dr. Warshak had no relevant disclosures.
VIDEO: Public reporting of congenital heart disease outcomes should be easily understood
HOUSTON – Survival statistics, surgeon-specific experience, and complication rates are the types of information most sought by parents of children with congenital heart disease, results from a large survey suggest.
Future efforts in public reporting for congenital heart surgery outcomes should have better methods for presenting the data in a valid, easily interpreted format, explained study investigator Mallory L. Irons, MD, an integrated cardiac surgery resident at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“We’re doing a good job of public reporting currently, but what we’re doing is not meeting the needs of all of our stakeholders – in this case, the parents of children with congenital heart disease,” Dr. Irons said in an interview at the annual meeting of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. “The optimal public reporting scheme still has yet to be determined.”
Dr. Irons reported having no financial disclosures.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
HOUSTON – Survival statistics, surgeon-specific experience, and complication rates are the types of information most sought by parents of children with congenital heart disease, results from a large survey suggest.
Future efforts in public reporting for congenital heart surgery outcomes should have better methods for presenting the data in a valid, easily interpreted format, explained study investigator Mallory L. Irons, MD, an integrated cardiac surgery resident at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“We’re doing a good job of public reporting currently, but what we’re doing is not meeting the needs of all of our stakeholders – in this case, the parents of children with congenital heart disease,” Dr. Irons said in an interview at the annual meeting of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. “The optimal public reporting scheme still has yet to be determined.”
Dr. Irons reported having no financial disclosures.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
HOUSTON – Survival statistics, surgeon-specific experience, and complication rates are the types of information most sought by parents of children with congenital heart disease, results from a large survey suggest.
Future efforts in public reporting for congenital heart surgery outcomes should have better methods for presenting the data in a valid, easily interpreted format, explained study investigator Mallory L. Irons, MD, an integrated cardiac surgery resident at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“We’re doing a good job of public reporting currently, but what we’re doing is not meeting the needs of all of our stakeholders – in this case, the parents of children with congenital heart disease,” Dr. Irons said in an interview at the annual meeting of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. “The optimal public reporting scheme still has yet to be determined.”
Dr. Irons reported having no financial disclosures.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
FROM THE STS ANNUAL MEETING HOUSTON
VIDEO: Coffee break at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar
WAILEA, HAWAII – A few attendees at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar discussed some of the highlights of the presentations during a coffee break at the meeting.
New treatment protocols for psoriasis, details about skin disease in children, managing medication side effects, and promising data about biologics are discussed in this video, as are updates on the latest tips for treating atopic dermatitis.
The interviewees had no conflicts to disclose.
The meeting is provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – A few attendees at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar discussed some of the highlights of the presentations during a coffee break at the meeting.
New treatment protocols for psoriasis, details about skin disease in children, managing medication side effects, and promising data about biologics are discussed in this video, as are updates on the latest tips for treating atopic dermatitis.
The interviewees had no conflicts to disclose.
The meeting is provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – A few attendees at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar discussed some of the highlights of the presentations during a coffee break at the meeting.
New treatment protocols for psoriasis, details about skin disease in children, managing medication side effects, and promising data about biologics are discussed in this video, as are updates on the latest tips for treating atopic dermatitis.
The interviewees had no conflicts to disclose.
The meeting is provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
AT SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR
VIDEO: Distinctive features define pediatric psoriasis
WAILEA, HAWAII – Plaque type psoriasis continues to be the most common type of psoriasis in children, but there are other presentations that should be considered, said Wynnis Tom, MD, a pediatric dermatologist at the University of California, San Diego, and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego.
“We certainly see a form of what some people would call napkin dermatitis,” or “diaper psoriasis,” affecting the diaper area in young infants, Dr. Tom said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
So when a child has a more refractory diaper rash, “look around to see if there are other lesions in the surrounding area that might be more typical for psoriasis,” she noted.
“We also see a lot more guttate disease” in children with psoriasis, which is more likely to be related to infections and triggers, Dr. Tom said. The face and scalp are often affected in children, and it is important to attend to these areas early to help avoid social stigma, she added.
Dr. Tom disclosed financial relationships with companies including Celgene, Janssen, and Promius. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – Plaque type psoriasis continues to be the most common type of psoriasis in children, but there are other presentations that should be considered, said Wynnis Tom, MD, a pediatric dermatologist at the University of California, San Diego, and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego.
“We certainly see a form of what some people would call napkin dermatitis,” or “diaper psoriasis,” affecting the diaper area in young infants, Dr. Tom said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
So when a child has a more refractory diaper rash, “look around to see if there are other lesions in the surrounding area that might be more typical for psoriasis,” she noted.
“We also see a lot more guttate disease” in children with psoriasis, which is more likely to be related to infections and triggers, Dr. Tom said. The face and scalp are often affected in children, and it is important to attend to these areas early to help avoid social stigma, she added.
Dr. Tom disclosed financial relationships with companies including Celgene, Janssen, and Promius. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – Plaque type psoriasis continues to be the most common type of psoriasis in children, but there are other presentations that should be considered, said Wynnis Tom, MD, a pediatric dermatologist at the University of California, San Diego, and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego.
“We certainly see a form of what some people would call napkin dermatitis,” or “diaper psoriasis,” affecting the diaper area in young infants, Dr. Tom said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
So when a child has a more refractory diaper rash, “look around to see if there are other lesions in the surrounding area that might be more typical for psoriasis,” she noted.
“We also see a lot more guttate disease” in children with psoriasis, which is more likely to be related to infections and triggers, Dr. Tom said. The face and scalp are often affected in children, and it is important to attend to these areas early to help avoid social stigma, she added.
Dr. Tom disclosed financial relationships with companies including Celgene, Janssen, and Promius. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
AT SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR
VIDEO: Pediatric psoriasis patients prepare for biologics
WAILEA, Hawaii – The first approval of a biologic for pediatric psoriasis, and ongoing clinical trials of other biologics in children with psoriasis, are among the encouraging therapeutic developments for this patient population, Wynnis Tom, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
“We are incredibly excited ... as pediatric dermatologists that we’re finally seeing breakthroughs” in terms of Food and Drug Administration activity regarding the use of biologics for treating psoriasis in children, Dr. Tom said in a video interview at the seminar.
Etanercept (Enbrel) is now approved for children with psoriasis, the first biologic indicated for pediatric psoriasis, and clinical trials of other biologics that have been available for adults and nonbiologic products for pediatric psoriasis are underway, she said.
However, getting insurance coverage can still be a challenge, although having long-term efficacy and safety data helps, noted Dr. Tom of the department of dermatology and pediatrics, University of California, San Diego, and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego. Also helpful is sending letters to insurers on behalf of the patient, describing the patient’s quality of life, descriptions of treatments that have been unsuccessful, and even photos documenting the disease in the child, she added.
Dr. Tom disclosed ties with Promius, Celgene, and Janssen.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, Hawaii – The first approval of a biologic for pediatric psoriasis, and ongoing clinical trials of other biologics in children with psoriasis, are among the encouraging therapeutic developments for this patient population, Wynnis Tom, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
“We are incredibly excited ... as pediatric dermatologists that we’re finally seeing breakthroughs” in terms of Food and Drug Administration activity regarding the use of biologics for treating psoriasis in children, Dr. Tom said in a video interview at the seminar.
Etanercept (Enbrel) is now approved for children with psoriasis, the first biologic indicated for pediatric psoriasis, and clinical trials of other biologics that have been available for adults and nonbiologic products for pediatric psoriasis are underway, she said.
However, getting insurance coverage can still be a challenge, although having long-term efficacy and safety data helps, noted Dr. Tom of the department of dermatology and pediatrics, University of California, San Diego, and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego. Also helpful is sending letters to insurers on behalf of the patient, describing the patient’s quality of life, descriptions of treatments that have been unsuccessful, and even photos documenting the disease in the child, she added.
Dr. Tom disclosed ties with Promius, Celgene, and Janssen.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, Hawaii – The first approval of a biologic for pediatric psoriasis, and ongoing clinical trials of other biologics in children with psoriasis, are among the encouraging therapeutic developments for this patient population, Wynnis Tom, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
“We are incredibly excited ... as pediatric dermatologists that we’re finally seeing breakthroughs” in terms of Food and Drug Administration activity regarding the use of biologics for treating psoriasis in children, Dr. Tom said in a video interview at the seminar.
Etanercept (Enbrel) is now approved for children with psoriasis, the first biologic indicated for pediatric psoriasis, and clinical trials of other biologics that have been available for adults and nonbiologic products for pediatric psoriasis are underway, she said.
However, getting insurance coverage can still be a challenge, although having long-term efficacy and safety data helps, noted Dr. Tom of the department of dermatology and pediatrics, University of California, San Diego, and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego. Also helpful is sending letters to insurers on behalf of the patient, describing the patient’s quality of life, descriptions of treatments that have been unsuccessful, and even photos documenting the disease in the child, she added.
Dr. Tom disclosed ties with Promius, Celgene, and Janssen.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
AT SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR
VIDEO: Nonsteroidal topical expands options for pediatric AD
WAILEA, HAWAII – In an interview, pediatric dermatologist Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, discusses a recently approved topical therapy for atopic dermatitis, which provides a nonsteroidal option for treating the disease in young patients.
“We’re really excited to have a new topical agent” for AD, Dr. Eichenfield said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
The product, crisaborole (Eucrisa), is a phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE-4) inhibitor, a new type of chemical entity “based on a different pathway of decreasing inflammation,” said Dr. Eichenfield, professor of dermatology and pediatrics at the University of California, San Diego. Crisaborole, the first new chemical entity to become available for treating AD since 2001, blocks PDE-4 and decreases cytokines, thereby reducing the inflammation in AD, he explained.
In the United States, the product is approved for the topical treatment of mild to moderate AD for patients aged 2 years and older. No serious adverse events attributed to crisaborole have been reported so far, in phase II and III studies and in a 1-year study, he said.
Dr. Eichenfield disclosed relationships with companies including Anacor/Pfizer, Genentech, Lilly, Regeneron/Sanofi, Medimetriks, and Otsuka. Crisaborole is manufactured by Anacor. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – In an interview, pediatric dermatologist Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, discusses a recently approved topical therapy for atopic dermatitis, which provides a nonsteroidal option for treating the disease in young patients.
“We’re really excited to have a new topical agent” for AD, Dr. Eichenfield said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
The product, crisaborole (Eucrisa), is a phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE-4) inhibitor, a new type of chemical entity “based on a different pathway of decreasing inflammation,” said Dr. Eichenfield, professor of dermatology and pediatrics at the University of California, San Diego. Crisaborole, the first new chemical entity to become available for treating AD since 2001, blocks PDE-4 and decreases cytokines, thereby reducing the inflammation in AD, he explained.
In the United States, the product is approved for the topical treatment of mild to moderate AD for patients aged 2 years and older. No serious adverse events attributed to crisaborole have been reported so far, in phase II and III studies and in a 1-year study, he said.
Dr. Eichenfield disclosed relationships with companies including Anacor/Pfizer, Genentech, Lilly, Regeneron/Sanofi, Medimetriks, and Otsuka. Crisaborole is manufactured by Anacor. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – In an interview, pediatric dermatologist Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, discusses a recently approved topical therapy for atopic dermatitis, which provides a nonsteroidal option for treating the disease in young patients.
“We’re really excited to have a new topical agent” for AD, Dr. Eichenfield said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
The product, crisaborole (Eucrisa), is a phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE-4) inhibitor, a new type of chemical entity “based on a different pathway of decreasing inflammation,” said Dr. Eichenfield, professor of dermatology and pediatrics at the University of California, San Diego. Crisaborole, the first new chemical entity to become available for treating AD since 2001, blocks PDE-4 and decreases cytokines, thereby reducing the inflammation in AD, he explained.
In the United States, the product is approved for the topical treatment of mild to moderate AD for patients aged 2 years and older. No serious adverse events attributed to crisaborole have been reported so far, in phase II and III studies and in a 1-year study, he said.
Dr. Eichenfield disclosed relationships with companies including Anacor/Pfizer, Genentech, Lilly, Regeneron/Sanofi, Medimetriks, and Otsuka. Crisaborole is manufactured by Anacor. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
