RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Variceal hemorrhage (VH) is a medical emergency. Prompt endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is therapeutic. Terlipressin is used in VH and continued for 2-5 days even after EVL. As hemostasis is primarily achieved by EVL, the benefit of continuing trelipressin after EVL is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of continuing terlipressin after EVL to prevent re-bleed and mortality. METHODS: In this pilot study, after EVL 74 patients of VH were randomized into two treatment groups TG2 & TG5, received terlipressin (1 mg IV bolus q 4 hourly) for 2 days and 5 days respectively and one control group (TG0), received 0.9% normal saline (10 mL IV bolus q 4 hourly) and followed up for 8 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 9 (12.6%) patients had re-bleed with maximum 4 (5.6%) patients in TG5 group followed by 3 (4.2%) in TG2 and 2 (2.8%) in TG0 groups (P=0.670). The overall mortality was 15 (21.1%) patients, 6 (8.5%) patients in TG0 group, followed by 5 (7.0%) in TG5 and 4 (5.6%) in TG2 group (P=0.691). Adverse drug reactions were significantly higher in treatment groups with maximum 18 (24.32%) patients in TG5, followed by 8 (10.8%) in TG2 and 2 (2.7%) in TG0 groups (P=0.00). Duration of hospital stay was also significantly higher in treatment group, 6.63 (±0.65) days in TG5 followed by 3.64 (±0.57) in TG2 and 2.40 (±0.50) days in TG0 groups (P=0.00). CONCLUSION: The rational for continuing terlipressin after EVL is doubtful as it didn't have any benefit for the prevention of re-bleed or mortality; rather it increased the risk of adverse drug reactions and duration of hospital stay. Further randomized clinical trials are encouraged to generate more evidence in support or against continuing terlipressin after EVL.

Assuntos

RESUMO

ABSTRACT Background Variceal hemorrhage (VH) is a medical emergency. Prompt endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is therapeutic. Terlipressin is used in VH and continued for 2—5 days even after EVL. As hemostasis is primarily achieved by EVL, the benefit of continuing trelipressin after EVL is unknown. Objective To evaluate the efficacy of continuing terlipressin after EVL to prevent re-bleed and mortality. Methods In this pilot study, after EVL 74 patients of VH were randomized into two treatment groups TG2 & TG5, received terlipressin (1 mg IV bolus q 4 hourly) for 2 days and 5 days respectively and one control group (TG0), received 0.9% normal saline (10 mL IV bolus q 4 hourly) and followed up for 8 weeks. Results A total of 9 (12.6%) patients had re-bleed with maximum 4 (5.6%) patients in TG5 group followed by 3 (4.2%) in TG2 and 2 (2.8%) in TG0 groups (P=0.670). The overall mortality was 15 (21.1%) patients, 6 (8.5%) patients in TG0 group, followed by 5 (7.0%) in TG5 and 4 (5.6%) in TG2 group (P=0.691). Adverse drug reactions were significantly higher in treatment groups with maximum 18 (24.32%) patients in TG5, followed by 8 (10.8%) in TG2 and 2 (2.7%) in TG0 groups (P=0.00). Duration of hospital stay was also significantly higher in treatment group, 6.63 (±0.65) days in TG5 followed by 3.64 (±0.57) in TG2 and 2.40 (±0.50) days in TG0 groups (P=0.00). Conclusion The rational for continuing terlipressin after EVL is doubtful as it didn't have any benefit for the prevention of re-bleed or mortality; rather it increased the risk of adverse drug reactions and duration of hospital stay. Further randomized clinical trials are encouraged to generate more evidence in support or against continuing terlipressin after EVL.

RESUMO Contexto A hemorragia varicosa (HV) é emergência médica. A ligadura endoscópica imediata das varizes (LEV) é terapêutica. A terlipressina é usada em HV e contínua por 2—5 dias mesmo após a LEV. Como a hemostasia é alcançada principalmente pela LEV, o benefício do uso contínuo da terlipressina após o evento é desconhecido. Objetivo Avaliar a eficácia da terlipressina contínua após a LEV para evitar o ressangramento e a mortalidade. Métodos Neste estudo piloto, após a LEV, 74 pacientes com HV foram randomizados em dois grupos de tratamento TG2 & TG5, que receberam terlipressina (1 mg EV em bolus a cada 4 horas) durante 2—5 dias, respectivamente, e um grupo controle (TG0), que receberam soro fisiológico normal de 0,9% (10 mL EV em bolus a cada 4 horas) e foram seguidos por 8 semanas. Resultados Um total de 9 (12,6%) pacientes tiveram ressangramento, 4 (5,6%) no grupo TG5, seguidos por 3 (4,2%) no TG2 e 2 (2,8%) no grupo TG0 (P=0,670). A mortalidade geral de pacientes foi de 15 (21,1%), 6 (8,5%) no grupo TG0, seguidos por 5 (7,0%) no TG5 e 4 (5,6%) no TG2 (P=0,691). As reações adversas de medicamentos foram significativamente maiores em grupos de tratamento em 18 (24,32%) pacientes no TG5, seguidos por 8 (10,8%) no TG2 e 2 (2,7%) em grupo TG0 (P=0,00). A duração da internação hospitalar também foi significativamente maior no grupo de tratamento, 6,63 (±0,65) dias no TG5, seguido por 3,64 (±0,57) em TG2 e 2,40 (±0,50) dias em grupos TG0 (P=0,00). Conclusão O uso racional para a continuação da terlipressina após a LEV é duvidoso, pois não teve qualquer benefício para a prevenção de ressangramento ou mortalidade; pelo contrário, aumentou o risco de efeitos adversos e duração da internação hospitalar. Outros ensaios clínicos randomizados são necessários para gerar mais evidências em apoio ou contra a terlipressina contínua após a LEV.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Traditionally peptic ulcer disease was the most common cause of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleed but with the changing epidemiology; other etiologies of UGI bleed are emerging. Many scores have been described for predicting outcomes and the need for intervention in UGI bleed but prospective comparison among them is scarce. OBJECTIVE: This study was planned to determine the etiological pattern of UGI bleed and to compare Glasgow Blatchford score, Pre-Endoscopy Rockall score, AIMS65, and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) as predictors of outcome. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study 268 patients of UGI bleed were enrolled and followed up for 8 weeks. Glasgow Blatchford score, Endoscopy Rockall score, AIMS65, and MEWS were calculated for each patient, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve for each score was compared. RESULTS: The most common etiology for UGI bleed were gastroesophageal varices 150 (63.55%) followed by peptic ulcer disease 29 (12.28%) and mucosal erosive disease 27 (11.44%). Total 38 (15.26%) patients had re-bleed and 71 (28.5%) patients died. Overall, 126 (47%) patients required blood component transfusion, 25 (9.3%) patients required mechanical ventilation and 2 (0.74%) patients required surgical intervention. Glasgow Blatchford score was the best in predicting the need for transfusion (cut off - 10, AUC-ROC= 0.678). Whereas AIMS65 with a score of ≥2 was best in predicting re-bleed (AUC-ROC=0.626) and mortality (AUC-ROC=0.725). CONCLUSION: Gastrointestinal bleed was most commonly of variceal origin at our tertiary referral center in Northern India. AIMS65 was the best & simplest score with a score of ≥2 for predicting re-bleed and mortality.

Assuntos

RESUMO

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Traditionally peptic ulcer disease was the most common cause of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleed but with the changing epidemiology; other etiologies of UGI bleed are emerging. Many scores have been described for predicting outcomes and the need for intervention in UGI bleed but prospective comparison among them is scarce. OBJECTIVE: This study was planned to determine the etiological pattern of UGI bleed and to compare Glasgow Blatchford score, Pre-Endoscopy Rockall score, AIMS65, and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) as predictors of outcome. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study 268 patients of UGI bleed were enrolled and followed up for 8 weeks. Glasgow Blatchford score, Endoscopy Rockall score, AIMS65, and MEWS were calculated for each patient, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve for each score was compared. RESULTS: The most common etiology for UGI bleed were gastroesophageal varices 150 (63.55%) followed by peptic ulcer disease 29 (12.28%) and mucosal erosive disease 27 (11.44%). Total 38 (15.26%) patients had re-bleed and 71 (28.5%) patients died. Overall, 126 (47%) patients required blood component transfusion, 25 (9.3%) patients required mechanical ventilation and 2 (0.74%) patients required surgical intervention. Glasgow Blatchford score was the best in predicting the need for transfusion (cut off - 10, AUC-ROC= 0.678). Whereas AIMS65 with a score of ≥2 was best in predicting re-bleed (AUC-ROC=0.626) and mortality (AUC-ROC=0.725). CONCLUSION: Gastrointestinal bleed was most commonly of variceal origin at our tertiary referral center in Northern India. AIMS65 was the best & simplest score with a score of ≥2 for predicting re-bleed and mortality.

RESUMO CONTEXTO: Tradicionalmente, a doença úlcera péptica era a causa mais comum de sangramento digestivo alto, mas com a mudança da epidemiologia, outras etiologias do sangramento do trato digestivo alto estão emergindo. Muitas pontuações têm sido descritas para prever resultados e a necessidade de intervenção na hemorragia gastrointestinal superior, mas a comparação prospectiva entre elas é escassa. OBJETIVO: Este estudo foi planeado para determinar o padrão etiológico de pacientes com hemorragia digestiva alta e comparar os escores de Glasgow Blatchford, o Rockall pré-endoscopia, o AIMS65 e o Early Warning modificado (MEWS) como preditores do resultado. MÉTODOS: Neste estudo prospetivo de coorte, 268 pacientes com sangramento digestivo alto foram acompanhados durante 8 semanas. Os escores Glasgow Blatchford, Rockall pré-endoscopia, AIMS65 e MEWS foram calculados para cada paciente, e a área sob a curva (AUC-ROC) para cada pontuação foi comparada. RESULTADOS: A etiologia mais comum para a hemorragia gastrointestinal alta foi varizes gastroesofágicas 150 (63,55%), seguida de úlcera péptica 29 (12,28%) e de doença erosiva de mucosa 27 (11,44%). No total, 38 (15,26%) doentes voltaram a sangrar e 71 (28,5%) doentes morreram. No total, 126 (47%) doentes necessitaram de transfusão de componentes sanguíneos, 25 (9,3%) necessitaram de ventilação mecânica e 2 (0,74%) destes doentes necessitaram de intervenção cirúrgica. O escore de Glasgow Blatchford foi o melhor na previsão da necessidade de transfusão (corte - 10, AUC-ROC =0,678). Enquanto o AIMS65 com uma pontuação de ≥2 foi o melhor na previsão de ressangramento (AUC-ROC =0,626) e mortalidade (AUC-ROC =0,725). CONCLUSÃO: O sangramento gastrointestinal alto mais comum é de origem varicosa em centro de referência terciária. O AIMS65 é o melhor escore simples, com uma pontuação de ≥2 para prever o ressangramento e a mortalidade.

RESUMO

A 43-year-old male patient, who received a deceased donor liver transplant for background ethanol-related decompensated cirrhosis, presented 7 months after transplant with mild abdominal distension and pain. On evaluation, the patient had thrombocytopenia, high serum-ascites albumin gradient ascites, and deranged liver functions. The Doppler study of the splenoportal axis showed hepatofugal flow in the recipient's portal vein, normal hepatic veins, a normal liver, splenomegaly, mild ascites, and multiple periportal collaterals. A transjugular liver biopsy and a hepatic venous pressure gradient measurement were done, which suggested mild portal tract inflammation with portal tract fibrosis with prominent portal venous thickening and normal hepatic venous pressure gradient (4 mm). However, the patient had a progressive increase in ascites and a dramatic increase in serum bilirubin level. A triple-phase computed tomography was done that showed rapid contrast flow in both the portal and hepatic arterial phase, suggesting arterialization of the portal flow with possible suspicion of a communicating arterioportal fistula. The patient underwent digital subtraction angiography, which was followed by an embolization of the arterioportal fistula. After embolization, serum bilirubin gradually decreased and ascites resolved. A repeat Doppler of the portal venous system showed established hepatopetal flow with progressively rising portal flow velocities.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Drug induced liver injury is a common cause of acute liver failure (ALF). While most of these cases are due to dose dependent hepatotoxicity with acetaminophen, idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is responsible for about 15% cases of ALF. Antibiotics are the most common cause of idiosyncratic DILI as well as DILI induced ALF. Etodolac is a selective cycloxygenase- 2 (COX -2) inhibitor non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug used as an analgesic and anti-inflammatory in musculoskeletal diseases. Severe liver impairment is extremely rare. Till date, only 3 cases of ALF related to etodolac have been reported in the literature. Here we report two cases with a unique presentation of ALF occurring due to DILI caused by etodolac, as diagnosed by Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM).

Assuntos

Assuntos