Elhanafi, Sherif

Introduction: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a major complication in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), contributing to increased morbidity, mortality, and health care burden. This study aimed to evaluate national trends and clinical outcomes associated with CDI in hospitalized IBD patients in the United States. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2012 to 2021. Adult patients hospitalized with a primary or secondary diagnosis of IBD (Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis) were stratified into 2 groups by the status of CDI diagnosis (either primary or secondary diagnosis). Demographic characteristics, hospital outcomes, and complications were compared between CDI and non-CDI cohorts. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of in-hospital mortality, septic shock, and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Results: Among 4,193,564 hospitalized IBD patients, 534,190 (12.7%) had CDI. CDI patients were older (mean: 68.8 vs 53.3 y, P < 0.001), with higher in-hospital mortality (3.6% vs 2.0%, P < 0.001), VTE (23.7% vs 6.2%, P < 0.001), septic shock (5.4% vs 4.0%, P < 0.001), and mechanical ventilation use (4.2% vs 2.8%, P < 0.001). Ulcerative colitis was more frequently associated with CDI than Crohn’s disease (30.3% vs 25.0%, P < 0.001) and independently predicted septic shock (OR: 1.09) and VTE (OR: 1.06) but was associated with lower mortality (OR: 0.81). Conclusion: The presence of CDI in hospitalized patients with IBD led to significantly worse outcomes. Ulcerative colitis is more commonly associated with CDI and increased risk of complications. These findings highlight the need for early detection, preventive strategies, and tailored management of CDI in the IBD population.

Background and aims Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is an essential procedure for patients who require long-term enteral nutrition but are unable to eat orally. However, it carries a risk of bleeding, particularly in patients on anticoagulation or dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). This study aimed to assess the bleeding risk associated with continuing anticoagulation or DAPT during PEG placement. Methods Using the TriNetX US Collaborative Network Database, we analyzed four cohorts: patients on anticoagulants, patients not on anticoagulants, patients on DAPT, and patients on aspirin (ASP), focusing on gastrostomy-related bleeding within 7 and 30 days, along with secondary outcomes such as mortality and the need for blood transfusion or endoscopic reintervention. Results Our analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the 7-day bleeding risk between the anticoagulant and no anticoagulant groups. However, a higher 30-day bleeding risk was observed in the anticoagulant group (0.9 vs. 0.4%, P = 0.007). There was no significant difference in the incidence of severe bleeding events requiring endoscopic intervention or blood transfusion. In addition, the difference in the bleeding risk between the DAPT and ASP groups was not statistically significant within 7 and 30 days. Conclusion These findings suggest that while anticoagulant use increases the risk of minor post-PEG bleeding, it does not lead to a higher incidence of severe bleeding. Additionally, the continuation of DAPT was not associated with statistically significant increase in bleeding risk. This study provides valuable insights into the management of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing PEG.

Abstract Background Endoscopic intervention for pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) has been associated with failures and increased need for additional endoscopic and non-endoscopic interventions. The primary aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage of PFCs in patients with DPDS. Methods In patients undergoing EUS-guided drainage of PFCs from January 2013 to January 2018, demographic profiles, procedural indications and details, adverse events, outcomes, and subsequent interventions were retrospectively collected. Overall treatment success was determined by PFC resolution on follow-up imaging or stent removal without recurrence. Results EUS-guided drainage of PFCs was performed in 141 patients. DPDS was present in 57 of them (40 %) and walled-off necrosis was the most frequent type of PFC (55 %). DPDS was not associated with lower clinical success, increased number of repeat interventions, or increased time to PFC resolution. Patients with DPDS were more likely to be treated with permanent transmural plastic double-pigtail stents (odds ratio [OR] 6.4; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 2.5 – 16.5; P < 0.001). However, when stents were removed, DPDS was associated with increased PFC recurrence after stent removal (OR 8.0; 95 %CI 1.2 – 381.8; P = 0.04). Conclusions DPDS frequently occurs in patients with PFCs but does not negatively impact successful resolution. DPDS is associated with increased PFC recurrence after stent removal.

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a quality marker of colonoscopy and operator performance. Prior studies evaluating the effect of an extended workday on the ADR reported variable outcomes that remain controversial. Given the variable results of prior studies and the potential legal implications of reduced ADR in the afternoon, we aimed to further evaluate this parameter and its effect on ADR. We performed a systematic review of the PubMed, CINAHL and Scopus electronic databases. Studies were included if they reported ADR in patients undergoing colonoscopy in the morning session and the afternoon session. Afternoon sessions included both sessions following a morning shift and half-day block shifts. Subgroup analyses were performed for ADR comparing morning and afternoon colonoscopies in a continuous workday, advanced ADRs (AADRs) and polyp detection rates (PDRs) were also compared. Thirteen articles with 17 341 (61.2%) performed in the morning session and 10 994 (38.8%) performed in the afternoon session were included in this study. There was no statistical significance in the ADR or AADR between morning and afternoon sessions, respectively [relative risk (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99–1.14] and (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.95–1.5). Afternoon procedures had a significantly higher PDR than morning procedures (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88–0.98). ADR was not significantly influenced in the afternoon session when operators continued to perform procedures throughout the day or on a half-day block schedule.

AbstractBackground and AimTumor genotyping may allow for improved prognostication and targeted therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We aimed to compare endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) with fine needle aspiration (FNA) to fine needle biopsy (FNB) for obtaining sufficient tissue for genomic analysis and theranostic potential.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of patients that underwent EUS‐FNA or EUS‐FNB with either positive or suspicious cytology for PDAC between March 2016 and December 2017. Demographic, procedural, and cytology data were recorded. Genetic alterations were recorded, and Kaplan–Meier survival curves were calculated.ResultsThe study included 167 patients: 145 patients had FNA and 22 patients underwent FNB. Overall, 117 samples (70.1%) were sufficient for targeted next‐generation sequencing. FNB resulted in a higher proportion of patients with sufficient samples compared with FNA (90.9% vs 66.9%; P = 0.02). In multivariable modeling, only FNB (odds ratio 4.95, 95% confidence interval 1.11–22.05, P = 0.04) was associated with sufficient sampling for genomic testing. FNB was more likely to obtain sufficient tissue from tumors ≤ 3 cm (100% vs 68.4%, P = 0.017) and tumors located in the head/neck of the pancreas (100% vs 63.1%, P = 0.03) compared with FNA. The most commonly identified alterations were in KRAS (88%), TP53 (68%), and SMAD4 (16%).ConclusionsEndoscopic ultrasonography can reliably obtain sufficient tissue from PDAC for targeted genomic sequencing for prognostication and theranostics. FNB should be considered when tumor genotyping is requested, especially for tumors ≤ 3 cm or tumors located in the head/neck of the pancreas.