Telemedicine involves delivering healthcare and preventative care services to patients without the need for in-person encounters. Traditionally, telemedicine has been used for acute events (e.g., ...stroke, used to relay essential information to the emergency department) and chronic disease management (e.g., diabetes and chronic kidney disease management). Though the utilization of telemedicine in gastroenterology and hepatology has been modest at best, especially for inflammatory bowel diseases and chronic liver disease management, since the onset of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, utilization of telemedicine in gastroenterology increased by 4000% in the first two weeks, equivalent to the last six years of growth before the pandemic. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) relaxed rules for the use of telemedicine with easing restrictions on reimbursements, location, licensing requirements (across state lines), and the need for a prior provider-patient relationship. These changes increased the use of telemedicine in inpatient and outpatient settings for gastroenterology-related referrals. The use of inpatient telephonic or video consults helps provide timely care during the pandemic while conserving personal protective equipment and decreasing provider and patient exposure. Nevertheless, telehealth use comes at the cost of no direct patient contact and lesser reimbursements. The appropriate use of technology and equipment, training of healthcare providers, use of platforms that can be integrated into the electronic health record while protecting the privacy and the flow of information are essential components of telemedicine. Furthermore, encouraging patients to seek medical care remotely with the proper equipment and improving digital literacy without the need for physical examinations is a challenge, further compounded in elderly or hard-of-hearing patients and in patients who are more comfortable with in-person visits. The authors will systematically review and discuss how telemedicine can be integrated into the practice of gastroenterology and hepatology, with emphasis placed on discussing barriers to success and the ways they can be mitigated.
The month of December 2019 became a critical part of the time of humanity when the first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was reported in the Wuhan, Hubei Province in China. As of April ...13th, 2020, there have been approximately 1.9 million cases and 199,000 deaths across the world, which were associated with COVID-19. The COVID-19 is the seventh coronavirus to be identified to infect humans. In the past, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome were the two coronaviruses that infected humans with a high fatality, particularly among the elderly. Fatalities due to COVID-19 are higher in patients older than 50 years of age or those with multimorbid conditions. The COVID-19 is mainly transmitted through respiratory droplets, with the most common symptoms being high fever, cough, myalgia, atypical symptoms included sputum production, headache, hemoptysis and diarrhea. However, the incubation period can range from 2 to 14 days without any symptoms. It is particularly true with gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms in which patients can still shed the virus even after pulmonary symptoms have resolved. Given the high percentage of COVID-19 patients that present with GI symptoms (e.g., nausea and diarrhea), screening patients for GI symptoms remain essential. Recently, cases of fecal–oral transmission of COVID-19 have been confirmed in the USA and China, indicating that the virus can replicate in both the respiratory and digestive tract. Moreover, the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, diagnostic procedures, treatments and prevention of the gastrointestinal manifestations of COVID-19 remain to be elucidated.
A new coronavirus emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan city of China, named as the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), and the disease was called coronavirus disease‐2019 ...(COVID‐19). The infection due to this virus spread exponentially throughout China and then spread across >205 nations, including the United States (US). Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopies are routinely performed in the US and globally. Previous reports of isolated infection outbreaks were reported with endoscopes acting as potential vectors. While multidrug‐resistant organisms have been reported to be spread by endoscopes, few cases of viruses such as hepatitis B and C are noted in the literature. COVID‐19 is predominately spread by droplet transmission, although recent evidence has showed that shedding in feces and feco‐oral transmission could also be possible. It is unclear if COVID‐19 could be transmitted by endoscopes, but it could theoretically happen due to contact with mucous membranes and body fluids. GI endoscopies involve close contact with oral and colonic contents exposing endoscopy staff to respiratory and oropharyngeal secretions. This can increase the risk of contamination and contribute to virus transmission. Given these risks, all major GI societies have called for rescheduling elective non‐urgent procedures and perform only emergent or urgent procedures based on the clinical need. Furthermore, pre‐screening of all individuals prior to endoscopy is recommended. This article focuses on the risk of COVID‐19 transmission by GI shedding, the potential role of endoscopes as a vector of this novel virus, including transmission during endoscopies, and prevention strategies including deferral of elective non‐urgent endoscopy procedures.
Sepsis is a heterogeneous disease and identification of its subclasses may facilitate and optimize clinical management. This study aimed to identify subclasses of sepsis and its responses to ...different amounts of fluid resuscitation.
This was a retrospective study conducted in an intensive care unit at a large tertiary care hospital. The patients fulfilling the diagnostic criteria of sepsis from June 1, 2001 to October 31, 2012 were included. Clinical and laboratory variables were used to perform the latent profile analysis (LPA). A multivariable logistic regression model was used to explore the independent association of fluid input and mortality outcome.
In total, 14,993 patients were included in the study. The LPA identified four subclasses of sepsis: profile 1 was characterized by the lowest mortality rate and having the largest proportion and was considered the baseline type; profile 2 was characterized by respiratory dysfunction; profile 3 was characterized by multiple organ dysfunction (kidney, coagulation, liver, and shock), and profile 4 was characterized by neurological dysfunction. Profile 3 showed the highest mortality rate (45.4%), followed by profile 4 (27.4%), 2 (18.2%), and 1 (16.9%). Overall, the amount of fluid needed for resuscitation was the largest on day 1 (median 5115 mL, interquartile range (IQR) 2662 to 8800 mL) and decreased rapidly on day 2 (median 2140 mL, IQR 900 to 3872 mL). Higher cumulative fluid input in the first 48 h was associated with reduced risk of hospital mortality for profile 3 (odds ratio (OR) 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.95 for each 1000 mL increase in fluid input) and with increased risk of death for profile 4 (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.30).
The study identified four subphenotypes of sepsis, which showed different mortality outcomes and responses to fluid resuscitation. Prospective trials are needed to validate our findings.
The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has become a global health crisis since its first appearance in Wuhan, China. Current epidemiological studies suggest that COVID-19 affects older patients ...with multiple comorbidities, such as hypertension, obesity, and chronic lung diseases. The differences in the incidence and severity of COVID-19 are likely to be multifaceted, depending on various biological, social, and economical factors. Specifically, the socioeconomic differences and psychological impact of COVID-19 affecting males and females are essential in pandemic mitigation and preparedness. Previous clinical studies have shown that females are less susceptible to acquire viral infections and reduced cytokine production. Female patients have a higher macrophage and neutrophil activity as well as antibody production and response. Furthermore,
studies of the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) showed higher expression in the kidneys of male than female patients, which may explain the differences in susceptibility and progression of COVID-19 between male and female patients. However, it remains unknown whether the expression of ACE2 differs in the lungs of male or female patients. Disparities in healthcare access and socioeconomic status between ethnic groups may influence COVID-19 rates. Ethnic groups often have higher levels of medical comorbidities and lower socioeconomic status, which may increase their risk of contracting COVID-19 through weak cell-mediated immunity. In this article, we examine the current literature on the gender and racial differences among COVID-19 patients and further examine the possible biological mechanisms underlying these differences.
Hepatitis D virus (HDV) is a defective virus that completes its life cycle only with hepatitis B virus (HBV). The HBV with HDV super-infection has been considered as one of the most severe forms of ...the chronic viral hepatitis. However, there is a scarcity of data on the global burden of HDV infection.
We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and China Knowledge Resource Integrated databases from 1 January 1977 to 31 December 2016. We included studies with a minimum sample size of 50 patients. Our study analysed data from a total of 40 million individuals to estimate the prevalence of HDV by using Der-Simonian Laird random-effects model. The data were further categorised according to risk factors.
From a total of 2717 initially identified studies, only 182 articles from 61 countries and regions met the final inclusion criteria. The overall prevalence of HDV was 0.98% (95% CI 0.61 to 1.42). In HBsAg-positive population, HDV pooled prevalence was 14.57% (95% CI 12.93 to 16.27): Seroprevalence was 10.58% (95% CI 9.14 to 12.11) in mixed population without risk factors of intravenous drug use (IVDU) and high-risk sexual behaviour (HRSB). It was 37.57% (95% CI 29.30 to 46.20) in the IVDU population and 17.01% (95% CI 10.69 to 24.34) in HRSB population.
We found that approximately 10.58% HBsAg carriers (without IVDU and HRSB) were coinfected with HDV, which is twofold of what has been estimated before. We also noted a substantially higher HDV prevalence in the IVDU and HRSB population. Our study highlights the need for increased focus on the routine HDV screening and rigorous implementation of HBV vaccine programme.
PDF
