Citations

Assessment of bone density is an important part of liver transplantation (LT) evaluation for early identification and treatment of osteoporosis. Dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry (DXA) is currently the standard clinical test for osteoporosis; however, it may contribute to the appointment burden on LT candidates during the cumbersome evaluation process, and there are limitations affecting its accuracy. In this study, we evaluate the utility of biomechanical analysis of vertebral images obtained during dual‐energy abdominal triple‐phase computed tomography (TPCT) in diagnosing osteoporosis among LT candidates. We retrospectively reviewed cases evaluated for LT between January 2017 and March 2018. All patients who underwent TPCT within 3 months of DXA were included. The biomechanical computed tomography (BCT) analysis was performed at a centralized laboratory (O.N. Diagnostics, Berkeley, CA) by 2 trained analysts blinded to the DXA data. DXA‐based osteoporosis was defined as a T score ≤−2.5 at the hip or spine. BCT‐based osteoporosis was defined as vertebral strength ≤4500 N for women or ≤6500 N for men or trabecular volumetric bone mineral density ≤80 mg/cm3. Comparative data were available for 91 patients who had complete data for both DXA and BCT: 31 women and 60 men, age 54 ± 11 years (mean ± standard deviation), mean body mass index 28 ± 6 kg/m2. Using DXA as the clinical reference, sensitivity of BCT to detect DXA‐defined osteoporosis was 83.3% (20/24 patients) and negative predictive value was 91.7%; specificity and positive predictive value were 65.7% and 46.5%, respectively. BCT analysis of vertebral images on triple‐phase computed tomography, routinely obtained during transplant evaluation, can reliably rule out osteoporosis in LT candidates. Patients with suspicion of osteoporosis on TPCT may need further evaluation by DXA.

Abstract The purpose of this scoping review by the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID‐19) Nutrition Task Force was to examine nutrition research applicable to the COVID‐19 pandemic. The rapid pace of emerging scientific information has prompted this activity to discover research/knowledge gaps. This methodology adhered with recommendations from the Joanna Briggs Institute. There were 2301 citations imported. Of these, there were 439 articles fully abstracted, with 23 main topic areas identified across 24 article types and sourced across 61 countries and 51 specialties in 8 settings and among 14 populations. Epidemiological/mechanistic relationships between nutrition and COVID‐19 were reviewed and results mapped to the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Time (PICO‐T) questions. The aggregated data were analyzed by clinical stage: pre–COVID‐19, acute COVID‐19, and chronic/post–COVID‐19. Research gaps were discovered for all PICO‐T questions. Nutrition topics meriting urgent research included food insecurity/societal infrastructure and transcultural factors (pre–COVID‐19); cardiometabolic‐based chronic disease, pediatrics, nutrition support, and hospital infrastructure (acute COVID‐19); registered dietitian nutritionist counseling (chronic/post–COVID‐19); and malnutrition and management (all stages). The paucity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was particularly glaring. Knowledge gaps were discovered for PICO‐T questions on pediatrics, micronutrients, bariatric surgery, and transcultural factors (pre–COVID‐19); enteral nutrition, protein‐energy requirements, and glycemic control with nutrition (acute COVID‐19); and home enteral and parenteral nutrition support (chronic/post–COVID‐19). In conclusion, multiple critical areas for urgent nutrition research were identified, particularly using RCT design, to improve nutrition care for patients before, during, and after COVID‐19.

Despite the evolving evidence in favor of shared decision making (SDM) and of decades-long calls for its adoption, SDM remains uncommon in routine care. Reflecting on this lack of progress, we sought to reimagine the future of SDM and the path to take us there. In late 2017, a multidisciplinary and international group of six researchers were challenged by a senior SDM scholar to envision the future and, based on a provocatively critical view of the present, to write letters to themselves from the year 2028. Letters were exchanged and discussed electronically. The group then met in person to discuss the letters. Since the letters painted a dystopian picture, they triggered questions about the nature of SDM, who should benefit from SDM, how to measure its contribution to care, and what new ways can be invented to design and test interventions to implement SDM in routine care. Through contrasting the purposefully generated dystopias with an ideal future for SDM, we generated reflections on a research agenda for SDM. These reflections hinged on recognizing SDM’s contributing to care, that is, as a way to advance the problematic human situation of patients. These focused on three distinct yet complimentary contributors to SDM: 1) the process of making decisions, 2) humanistic communication, and 3) fit-to-care of the resulting decision. The group then concluded that to move SDM from envisioned to routine practice, and to ensure it reaches all, particularly persons rendered vulnerable by current forms of health care, a substantial investment in implementation research is necessary. Perhaps the discussion of these reflections can contribute to a path forward that will improve the likelihood of the future we dream for SDM.

AbstractVasoactive drugs form the mainstay of therapy for two of the most important complications of liver disease: hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and acute variceal bleed (AVB). With cumulative evidence supporting the use in cirrhosis, terlipressin has been recommended for the management of HRS and AVB. However, owing to the safety concerns, terlipressin was not approved by food and drug administration (FDA) until now. In this review, we discuss the pharmacology and the major practice‐changing studies on the safety and efficacy of terlipressin in patients with cirrhosis particularly focusing on existing indications like AVB and HRS and reviewing new data on the expanding indications in liver disease. The references for this review were identified from PUBMED with MeSH terms such as “terlipressin,” “hepatorenal syndrome,” “varices, esophagal and gastric,” “ascites” and “cirrhosis.” Terlipressin, a synthetic analogue of vasopressin, was introduced in 1975 to overcome the adverse effects of vasopressin. Terlipressin is an effective drug for HRS reversal in patients with liver cirrhosis and acute‐on‐chronic liver failure. There is documented mortality benefit with terlipressin therapy in HRS and AVB. Adverse effects are common with terlipressin and need to be monitored strictly. There is some evidence to support the use of this drug in refractory ascites, hepatic hydrothorax, paracentesis‐induced circulatory dysfunction and perioperatively during liver transplantation. However, terlipressin is not yet recommended for such indications. In conclusion, terlipressin has stood the test of time with expanding indications and clear prerequisites for clinical use. Our review warrants a fresh perspective on the efficacy and safety of terlipressin.

AbstractObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the 30 day incidence of paravalvular leak (PVL) and need for aortic valve reintervention of a fourth generation balloon expandable transcatheter valve with enhanced skirt (4G‐BEV) (SAPIEN 3 Ultra) compared with a third generation balloon expandable transcatheter valve (3G‐BEV) (SAPIEN 3).BackgroundThe incidence of PVL has steadily declined with iterative improvements in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) technology and implantation strategies.MethodsPatients who underwent TAVR at Mayo Clinic from 7/2018 to 7/2019 were included in a prospective institutional registry. 4G‐BEV has been utilized since 2/2019, and, after this date, 3G‐BEV and 4G‐BEV were simultaneously used. 4G‐BEV had three sizes (20, 23, and 26 mm) while 3G‐BEV included four sizes (20, 23, 26, and 29 mm). Both cohorts were evaluated at 30 days post‐TAVR with a transthoracic echocardiogram to assess for PVL.ResultsA total of 260 consecutive patients were included. Of these, 101 patients received a 4G‐BEV and 159 patients received a 3G‐BEV. There were more females (p = .0005) and a lower aortic valve calcium score (p = .02) in the 4G‐BEV cohort at baseline. Age, STS risk score, NYHA Class, and aortic valve mean gradient did not differ between groups. 4G‐BEV was associated with a lower incidence of mild PVL (10.8 vs. 36.5%; p < .0001) and moderate PVL (0 vs. 5.8%) compared to the 3G‐BEV at 30 days. There was no association between PVL and valve size in either cohort.ConclusionsUtilization of 4G‐BEV is associated with reduced PVL at 30 days post‐TAVR compared with 3G‐BEV.