METHODS: The GI-COVID-19 is a prospective, multicenter, controlled study. Patients with and without COVID-19 diagnosis were recruited at hospital admission and asked for GI symptoms at admission and after 1 month, using the validated Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale questionnaire.
RESULTS: The study included 2036 hospitalized patients. A total of 871 patients (575 COVID+ and 296 COVID-) were included for the primary analysis. GI symptoms occurred more frequently in patients with COVID-19 (59.7%; 343/575 patients) than in the control group (43.2%; 128/296 patients) (P < 0.001). Patients with COVID-19 complained of higher presence or intensity of nausea, diarrhea, loose stools, and urgency as compared with controls. At a 1-month follow-up, a reduction in the presence or intensity of GI symptoms was found in COVID-19 patients with GI symptoms at hospital admission. Nausea remained increased over controls. Factors significantly associated with nausea persistence in COVID-19 were female sex, high body mass index, the presence of dyspnea, and increased C-reactive protein levels.
DISCUSSION: The prevalence of GI symptoms in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is higher than previously reported. Systemic and respiratory symptoms are often associated with GI complaints. Nausea may persist after the resolution of COVID-19 infection.
METHODS: We obtained 80 CRC histopathological specimens sent to the Pathology Laboratory of Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia from 2015 to 2019. Data on demographic factors, body mass index (BMI), and clinicopathological characteristics were also collected. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues were stained by using an optimized immunohistochemical protocol.
RESULTS: Patients were mostly older than 50 years, male, Malay, and overweight or obese. A high apoB expression was observed in 87.5% CRC samples (70/80), while a high 4HNE expression was observed in only 17.5% (14/80) of CRCs. The expression of apoB was significantly associated with the sigmoid and rectosigmoid tumor sites (p =0.001) and tumor size 3-5 cm (p =0.005). 4HNE expression was significantly associated with tumor size 3-5 cm (p =0.045). Other variables were not significantly associated with the expression of either marker.
CONCLUSION: ApoB and 4HNE proteins may play a role in promoting CRC carcinogenesis.
AIMS: We evaluated the performance of machine learning (ML) and non-patented scores for ruling out SF among NAFLD/MASLD patients.
METHODS: Twenty-one ML models were trained (N = 1153), tested (N = 283), and validated (N = 220) on clinical and biochemical parameters of histologically-proven NAFLD/MASLD patients (N = 1656) collected across 14 centres in 8 Asian countries. Their performance for detecting histological-SF (≥F2fibrosis) were evaluated with APRI, FIB4, NFS, BARD, and SAFE (NPV/F1-score as model-selection criteria).
RESULTS: Patients aged 47 years (median), 54.6% males, 73.7% with metabolic syndrome, and 32.9% with histological-SF were included in the study. Patients with SFvs.no-SF had higher age, aminotransferases, fasting plasma glucose, metabolic syndrome, uncontrolled diabetes, and NAFLD activity score (p 140) was next best in ruling out SF (NPV of 0.757, 0.724 and 0.827 in overall, test and validation set).
CONCLUSIONS: ML with clinical, anthropometric data and simple blood investigations perform better than FIB-4 for ruling out SF in biopsy-proven Asian NAFLD/MASLD patients.
Methods: Cirrhotic patients with suspected EVB were screened (n = 352). Eligible patients were assigned based on the physician's preference to either somatostatin (group S) or terlipressin (group T) followed by EVL. In group S, intravenous bolus (250 µg) of somatostatin followed by 250 µg/hour was continued for three days. In group T, 2 mg bolus injection of terlipressin was followed by 1 mg infusion every 6 h for three days.
Results: A total of 150 patients were enrolled; 41 in group S and 109 in group T. Reasons for physician preference was convenience in administration (77.1%) for group T and good safety profile (73.2%) for group S. Very early rebleeding within 49-120 h occurred in one patient in groups S and T (p = 0.469). Four patients in group S and 14 patients in group T have variceal rebleeding episodes within 6-42 d (p = 0.781). Overall treatment-related adverse effects were compatible in groups S and T (p = 0.878), but the total cost of terlipressin and somatostatin differed i.e., USD 621.32 and USD 496.43 respectively.
Conclusions: Terlipressin is the preferred vasoactive agent by physicians in our institution for acute EVB. Convenience in administration and safety profile are main considerations of physicians. Safety and hemostatic effects did not differ significantly between short-course somatostatin or terlipressin, although terlipressin is more expensive.