Citations

Small intestinal biopsy interpretation has been the cornerstone for the diagnosis of celiac disease for over 50 years. Despite the existence of sensitive and specific serological tests, duodenal mucosal biopsies continue to be obtained in the vast majority of patients in whom a diagnosis of celiac disease is being considered. The accurate evaluation of these biopsies requires coordination and information sharing between the gastroenterologist, laboratory, and pathologist in order to optimize tissue sampling, preparation and interpretation. This document, a collaboration between the Rodger C. Haggitt Gastrointestinal Pathology Society and the North American Association for the Study of Celiac Disease, is intended to provide clinicians and pathologists with a summary of best practices in the use of endoscopy and biopsy for patients with suspected celiac disease. The authors present a comprehensive and critical appraisal of the literature with respect to the topics of endoscopic findings, best methods for the obtaining biopsies, completing the pathology form and pathologic assessment, including evaluating intraepithelial lymphocytes and villous architecture. A discussion of conditions with overlapping pathologic findings in duodenal mucosal biopsies is presented. In order to provide additional guidance for challenging situations, the authors include an appendix containing practical suggestions. This review may be utilized in interdisciplinary discussions to optimize care for patients with possible celiac disease.

SummaryBackgroundThere are limited data to inform positioning of agents for treating moderate‐severe Crohn's disease (CD).AimWe assessed comparative efficacy and safety of first‐line (biologic‐naïve) and second‐line (prior exposure to anti‐tumour necrosis factor [TNF]‐α) agents) biologic therapy for moderate‐severe CD, through a systematic review and network meta‐analysis, and appraised quality of evidence (QoE) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.MethodsWe identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with moderate‐severe CD treated with approved anti‐TNF agents, anti‐integrin agents and anti‐IL12/23 agents, first‐line or second‐line, and compared with placebo or another active agent. Efficacy outcomes were induction and maintenance of clinical remission; safety outcomes were serious adverse events and infections. Network meta‐analyses were performed, and ranking was assessed using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities.ResultsNo head‐to‐head trials were identified. In biologic‐naïve patients, infliximab (SUCRA,0.93) and adalimumab (SUCRA,0.75) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission (moderate QoE). In patients with prior anti‐TNF exposure, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.91; low QoE, in patients with prior response or intolerance to anti‐TNF agents) and ustekinumab (SUCRA, 0.71) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission. In patients with response to induction therapy, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.97) and infliximab (SUCRA, 0.68) were ranked highest for maintenance of remission. Ustekinumab had lowest risk of serious adverse events (SUCRA, 0.72) and infection (SUCRA, 0.71; along with infliximab, SUCRA, 0.83) in maintenance trials.ConclusionIndirect comparisons suggest that infliximab or adalimumab may be preferred first‐line agents, and ustekinumab a preferred second‐line agent, for induction of remission in patients with moderate‐severe CD. Head‐to‐head trials are warranted.

AimsThe aim of this study was to evaluate near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) as a continuous, non-invasive monitor for acute compartment syndrome (ACS).Patients and MethodsNIRS sensors were placed on 86 patients with, and 23 without (controls), severe leg injury. NIRS values were recorded for up to 48 hours. Longitudinal data were analyzed using summary and graphical methods, bivariate comparisons, and multivariable multilevel modelling.ResultsMean NIRS values in the anterior, lateral, superficial posterior, and deep posterior compartments were between 72% and 78% in injured legs, between 69% and 72% in uninjured legs, and between 71% and 73% in bilaterally uninjured legs. In patients without ACS, the values were typically > 3% higher in injured compartments. All seven limbs with ACS had at least one compartment where NIRS values were 3% or more below a reference uninjured control compartment. Missing data were encountered in many instances.ConclusionNIRS oximetry might be used to aid the assessment and management of patients with ACS. Sustained hyperaemia is consistent with the absence of ACS in injured legs. Loss of the hyperaemic differential warrants heightened surveillance. NIRS values in at least one injured compartment(s) were > 3% below the uninjured contralateral compartment(s) in all seven patients with ACS. Additional interventional studies are required to validate the use of NIRS for ACS monitoring. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:787–97.

Introduction: In response to reported difficulties in selecting a Medicare Part D prescription drug plan, we designed a patient-centered online Part D plan selection tool (CHOICE1.0) to simplify the selection process and to provide personalized, expert recommendations. Methods: This ethnographic comparative usability study observed 44 patients using the first version of the tool during Medicare 2016 Open Enrollment. Participants were observed as they chose their drug plan using Medicare.gov and 1 of 3 versions of CHOICE1.0 that varied in amount of expert guidance. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze exit survey data. The observations were video-recorded, and field notes were analyzed thematically. Results: Participants were significantly more satisfied with CHOICE1.0 for choosing a plan, understanding information, and ease of use compared to Medicare.gov . Those using expert versions of CHOICE1.0 were more likely to indicate their intention to switch plans than those using Medicare.gov , though they wanted to know the source and content. Conclusion: The more patient-centered prescription drug choice tool improved user experience and enabled users to choose plans more consistent with expert recommendations.

AbstractThe gastrointestinal barrier and the blood brain barrier represent an important line of defense to protect the underlying structures against harmful external stimuli. These host barriers are composed of epithelial and endothelial cells interconnected by tight junction proteins along with several other supporting structures. Disruption in host barrier structures has therefore been implicated in various diseases of the gastrointestinal tract and the central nervous system. While there are several factors that influence host barrier, recently there is an increasing appreciation of the role of gut microbiota and their metabolites in regulating barrier integrity. In the current issue of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, Marungruang et al. describe the effect of gastrointestinal barrier maturation on gut microbiota and the blood brain barrier adding to the growing evidence of microbiota‐barrier interactions. In this mini‐review I will discuss the effect of gut microbiota on host epithelial barriers and its implications for diseases associated with disrupted gut‐brain axis.

Abstract Background Sexual dysfunction is often complex and biopsychosocial. Traditional sexual health care management involves individual providers not in a multi-disciplinary setting. A multi-disciplinary team may consist of a medical provider, pelvic floor physical therapist, and sex therapist. Aim The aim was to explore the patient perceptions of benefit from management of their sexual dysfunction by a biopsychosocial multi-disciplinary team. Methods A survey was e-mailed to women patients seen by multi-disciplinary teams at 2 different settings: San Diego Sexual Medicine or Mayo Clinic Women's Health Clinic during a 27-month period. Data are reported using summary statistics for age and count for remaining survey responses. Cochran-Armitage tests for trend were used to compare pre- and post-comfort levels. Outcomes Main outcome measures included perceived benefit of being managed in a team-based model of care, level of benefit and satisfaction from each provider, and difference from pre-conceived level of comfort to actual comfort after each provider visit. Results 89 of 270 e-mailed surveys were analyzed. Patient populations (mean age 47.6, range 23–77 years) were similar between sites. Overall, 82% of respondents reported moderate/great benefit from the team-based model; 72.1% reported management by all 3 providers valuable/extremely valuable; and 84.3% were somewhat/very satisfied with the model. Women endorsed specific ways in which they benefitted from the team-based model including: improved sexual function (58.1%), feeling validated (72.1%) and listened to (62.8%), that they better understood their health concerns (65.1%), that their partner better understood their health concerns (46.5%), and feeling normal (46.5%). There were no significant differences between the 2 clinics in terms of patient-perceived benefit, value, or satisfaction. Conclusions The team-based model of care for management of sexual dysfunction in women including a medical provider, physical therapist, and sex therapist is associated with patient-perceived benefit, satisfaction, and value.