Brahmbhatt, Bhaumik

Abstract Background Colectomy is the curative management for ulcerative colitis (UC). Multiple studies have reported racial disparities for colectomy before the advent of anti-TNF alpha agents. The aim of this study was to describe racial and geographic differences in colectomy rates among hospitalized patients with UC after anti-TNF therapy was introduced. Methods We examined all patients discharged from the hospital between 2010 and 2014 with a primary diagnosis of UC or of complications of UC. The data were evaluated for race and colectomy rates among the hospitalized patients with UC. Results The unadjusted national colectomy rate among hospitalized patients with UC between 2010 and 2014 was 3.90 per 1000 hospitalization days (95% confidence interval, 3.72-4.08). The undajusted colectomy rates in African American (2.33 vs 4.35; P < 0.001) and Hispanic patients (3.99 vs 4.35; P ≤ 0.009) were considerably lower than those for White patients. After adjustment for confounders, the incidence rate ratio for African American as compared to White patients was 0.43 (95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.58; P < 0.001). Geographic region of the United States also showed significant variation in colectomy rates, with western regions having the highest rate (4.76 vs 3.20; P < 0.001). Conclusions Racial and geographical disparities persist for the rate of colectomy among hospitalized patients with UC. The national database analysis reveals that colectomy rates for hospitalized African American and Hispanic patients were lower than those for White patients. Further studies are important to determine the social and biologic foundations of these disparities.

The relative risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) among different direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is debatable. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DOACs with each other are lacking. We performed network meta-analysis to assess whether the risk of major GIB differs based on type and dose of DOAC. Literature search of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases from inception to August 2019, limited to English publications, was conducted to identify RCTs comparing DOACs with warfarin or enoxaparin for any indication. Primary outcome of interest was major GIB risk. We used frequentist network meta-analysis through the random-effects model to compare DOACs with each other and DOACs by dose to isolate the impact on major GIB. Twenty-eight RCTs, including 139 587 patients receiving six anticoagulants, were selected. The risk of major GIB for DOACs was equal to warfarin. Comparison of DOACs with each other did not show risk differences. After accounting for dose, rivaroxaban 20 mg, dabigatran 300 mg and edoxaban 60 mg daily had 47, 40 and 22% higher rates of major GIB versus warfarin, respectively. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily had lower major GIB compared to dabigatran 300 mg (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44–0.88) and rivaroxaban 20 mg (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43–0.83) daily. Heterogeneity was low, and the model was consistent without publication bias (Egger’s test: P = 0.079). All RCTs were high-quality with low risk of bias. DOACs at standard dose, except apixaban, had a higher risk of major GIB compared to warfarin. Apixaban had a lower rate of major GIB compared to dabigatran and rivaroxaban.

Objective Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients have moderately increased risk of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC). We evaluated the incidence and survival of PAC in 2 cohorts and aimed to identify potential risk factors. Methods This study performed a retrospective cohort analysis. Cohort A was extracted from the United Network of Organ Sharing data set and cohort B from SOT recipients evaluated at 3 Mayo Clinic transplant centers. The primary outcome was age-adjusted annual incidence of PAC. Descriptive statistics, hazard ratios, and survival rates were compared. Results Cohort A and cohort B included 617,042 and 29,472 SOT recipients, respectively. In cohort A, the annual incidence rate was 12.78 per 100,000 in kidney-pancreas, 13.34 in liver, and 21.87 in heart-lung transplant recipients. Receiving heart-lung transplant, 50 years or older, and history of cancer (in either recipient or donor) were independent factors associated with PAC. Fifty-two patients developed PAC in cohort B. Despite earlier diagnosis (21.15% with stage I–II), survival rates were similar to those reported for sporadic (non-SOT) patients. Conclusions We report demographic and clinical risk factors for PAC after SOT, many of which were present before transplant and are common to sporadic pancreatic cancer. Despite the diagnosis at earlier stages, PAC in SOT portends a very poor survival.