Author Archives: gutsandgrowth

Unknown's avatar

About gutsandgrowth

I am a pediatric gastroenterologist at GI Care for Kids (previously called CCDHC) in Atlanta, Georgia. The goal of my blog is to share some of my reading in my field more broadly. In addition, I wanted to provide my voice to a wide range of topics that often have inaccurate or incomplete information. Before starting this blog in 2011, I would tear out articles from journals and/or keep notes in a palm pilot. This blog helps provide an updated source of information that is easy to access and search, along with links to useful multimedia sources. I was born and raised in Chattanooga. After graduating from the University of Virginia, I attended Baylor College of Medicine. I completed residency and fellowship training at the University of Cincinnati at the Children’s Hospital Medical Center. I received funding from the National Institutes of Health for molecular biology research of the gastrointestinal tract. During my fellowship, I had the opportunity to work with some of the most amazing pediatric gastroenterologists and mentors. Some of these individuals included Mitchell Cohen, William Balistreri, James Heubi, Jorge Bezerra, Colin Rudolph, John Bucuvalas, and Michael Farrell. I am grateful for their teaching and their friendship. During my training with their help, I received a nationwide award for the best research by a GI fellow. I have authored numerous publications/presentations including original research, case reports, review articles, and textbook chapters on various pediatric gastrointestinal problems. In addition, I have been recognized by Atlanta Magazine as a "Top Doctor" in my field multiple times. Currently, I am the vice chair of the section of nutrition for the Georgia Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics. In addition, I am an adjunct Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at Emory University School of Medicine. Other society memberships have included the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN), American Academy of Pediatrics, the Food Allergy Network, the American Gastroenterology Association, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, and the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation. As part of a national pediatric GI organization called NASPGHAN (and its affiliated website GIKids), I have helped develop educational materials on a wide-range of gastrointestinal and liver diseases which are used across the country. Also, I have been an invited speaker for national campaigns to improve the evaluation and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease, celiac disease, eosinophilic esophagitis, hepatitis C, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Some information on these topics has been posted at my work website, www.gicareforkids.com, which has links to multiple other useful resources. I am fortunate to work at GI Care For Kids. Our group has 17 terrific physicians with a wide range of subspecialization, including liver diseases, feeding disorders, eosinophilic diseases, inflammatory bowel disease, cystic fibrosis, DiGeorge/22q, celiac disease, and motility disorders. Many of our physicians are recognized nationally for their achievements. Our group of physicians have worked closely together for many years. None of the physicians in our group have ever left to join other groups. I have also worked with the same nurse (Bernadette) since I moved to Atlanta in 1997. For many families, more practical matters about our office include the following: – 14 office/satellite locations – physicians who speak Spanish – cutting edge research – on-site nutritionists – on-site psychology support for abdominal pain and feeding disorders – participation in ImproveCareNow to better the outcomes for children with inflammatory bowel disease – office endoscopy suite (lower costs and easier scheduling) – office infusion center (lower costs and easier for families) – easy access to nursing advice (each physician has at least one nurse) I am married and have two sons (both adults). I like to read, walk/hike, bike, swim, and play tennis with my free time. I do not have any financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies or other financial relationships to disclose. I have helped enroll patients in industry-sponsored research studies.

Outcomes of Liver Transplantation in Small Infants

Posted on by

A recent study (H Yamamoto et al. Liver Transplantation 2019; 25: 1561-70) provides data on the outcomes of infants who underwent liver transplantation (LT) in the United Kingdom (King’s College Hospital).

A total of 64 infants underwent LT (1989-2014) at a single institution. The authors compared “extra-small” (XS) infants in the first 3 months of life to “small” (S) who were 3-6 months of age.

Key findings:

  • Acute liver failure was the main indication for LT in the XS group (n=31, 84%) compared to the S group (7, 26%)
  • Hepatic artery thrombosis and portal vein thrombosis were similar in both groups: 5.4% and 10.8% in the XS and 7.4% and 11.1% in the S group
  • Bilary stricture and leakage were similar: 5.4% and 2.7% in the XS and 3.7% and 3.7% in the S group
  • 1-, 5-, and 10-year survivals were 70.3%, 70.3% and 70.3% in the XS group and 92.6%, 88.9%, and 88.9% in the S group (not statistically significant)

Related blog posts:

Quebec City, Frontenac Hotel and Boardwalk (early in the day)

How Benign Are Juvenile Polyps?

Posted on by

A recent retrospective study (N Ibrahimi et al. JPGN 2019; 69: 668-72) reviewed juvenile polyp characteristics over a 14 year period (2003-17) from 213 pediatric subjects who underwent 326 procedures.  The authors state their review was intended for nonsyndromic juvenile polyps, though 23 of the patients had ≥5 polyps (which is incongruous with their presented methods of including children with less than 5 polyps).

Key findings:

  • The authors state that polyp recurrence rates on repeat colonoscopy were 1.5% if one polyp, 19.2% if 2-4 polyps, and 82.6% if 5-10 polyps
  • Juvenile polyps harbored adenomatous changes in 26 (12%) of patients
  • The presence of adenomatous changes did not correlate with polyp number; however, a polyp on the right-sided was more likely to harbor adenomatous changes

It is possible that some of the ‘recurrent’ polyps were missed polyps, as polyps can be easily overlooked.  I had a recent experience of removing numerous polyps (14) from a child recently and some were identified in part due repeated visualization of several colonic segments.  The recent ESPGHAN position paper is useful in children with multiple polyps; their recommendations include: In a child with a single JP, a repeat colonoscopy is not routinely required. (Weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence).

My take: This report is notable for the following:

  1. a fairly high rate of adenomatous changes in juvenile polyps.
  2. a high recurrence rate for children with multiple polyps

Related blog posts:

Quebec City

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

Healthcare: “Where the Frauds Are Legal”

Posted on by

A recent NY Times commentary: “Where the Frauds Are Legal” details another group of problems with health care economics.  These problems are on top of a long list of other problems which at their core relate to lack of price transparency/hidden charges and excessive charges for some services.

Here’s an excerpt:

Much of what we accept as legal in medical billing would be regarded as fraud in any other sector…

Medical Swag…Companies are permitted by insurers to bill for “durable medical equipment,” stuff you receive for home use when you’re in the hospital or doctors’ office. That yields some familiar marked-up charges, like the sling you can buy at Walgreens for $15 but for which you or your insurer get a bill for $120 after it is given to you at urgent care…

The Cover Charge…Trauma activation fees have been allowed since 2002, after 9/11, when the Trauma Center Association of America, an industry group, convinced regulators that they needed to be compensated for maintaining a state of “readiness.”…

Impostor Billing…We received bills from doctors my husband never met… for bedside treatment from people who never came anywhere near the bed to deliver the care…

The Drive-By…There was no significant health service given. Just an appearance and some boxes checked on a form. It’s a phenomenon called drive-by doctoring.

The Enforced Upgrade…[like meeting] in the emergency room [because clinic is closed]

Why do insurers pay? Partly because insurers have no way to know whether you got a particular item or service. But also because it’s not worth their time to investigate the millions of medical interactions they write checks for each day. Despite the advertised concern about your well-being, as one benefits manager enlightened me: They’re “too big to care about you.”…these are all everyday, normal experiences in today’s health care system, and they may be perfectly legal. If we want to tame the costs in our $3 trillion health system, we’ve got to rein in this behavior, which is fraud by any other name.

My take: I find it troubling to be a cog in a system that has such devious billing practices.  This particularly relates to my interactions when providing hospital-based care.  In our office, we have at least some measure of control and we can offer services like outpatient endoscopy at one-third of the cost compared to hospital-based endoscopy; similarly, our outpatient infusions are much more cost-effective than hospital-based infusions.

In terms of the health care system, my expectation is that there is not a strong enough incentive or empowerment for physicians to tackle rising health care costs (& low value care) and as such the industry will face a reckoning from outside forces.

Related blog posts:

Marketing of Insulin Explains a Lot About Our Health Care System

Posted on by

A recent commentary (M Fralick, AS Kesselheim. NEJM 2019; 381: 1793-5) describes the U.S. Insulin Crisis.

Background: 

  • In 1922, insulin was first injected into a 14-year-old boy with severe type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Prior to this, T1DM had been considered a universally fatal disease
  • Frederick Banting, John Macleod, and members or their team that discovered insulin sold their patent for $1 to assure it could be widely affordable
  • “U.S. law allows pharmaceutical manufacturers to price their products at whatever level they believe the market will bear and to raise prices over time without limit”
  • “Direct competition in the insulin market is lacking”
  • Since insulin is a biologic drug, this necessitates “additional testing beyond what is usually required for generic drugs before approval by the” FDA.

Current Situation:

  • A carton of insulin that sells for $300 in the U.S. could be purchased in Canada for $20 (in U.S. dollars)
  • Nearly 100 years after the development of insulin, “insulin is inaccessible to thousands of Americans because of its high cost.”

My take: Why does insulin cost 15 times more in the U.S. than Canada?   These excess costs with insulin are occurring despite a great deal scrutiny; unfortunately, U.S. consumers are paying extra for a wide range of pharmaceuticals.  Going from the Nobel discovery of insulin to our current state is a clear indication of the need to reform of our healthcare system.

Related blog posts:

Mural in Quebec City: La Fresque des Québécois

More Frequent Foreign Body Ingestions

Posted on by

A recent retrospective study (D Orsagh-Yentis) Pediatrics 2019; 143: pii:320181988) examined children <6 years of age (n=759,054) and presentation to an emergency department in the U.S. for a foreign body ingestion (FBI) from 1995-2015. This study was reviewed at our recent national meeting by David Brumbaugh -related blog post: #NASPGHAN19 Postgraduate Course (Part 1) (Slides below).

Key findings:

  • FBI rates increased from 9.5 to 18 per 10,000 during the 20 year study period
  • Coins accounted for 61.7% of FBI
  • Most children (89.7%) were able to be discharged after their suspected ingestion
  • Battery ingestion represented 0.14% of all ingestions in 1995  to 8.4% in 2015

Related blog posts:

 

Hidden Costs of Medical Schools

Posted on by

From NY Times: ‘I Have a Ph.D. in Not Having Money’

An excerpt:

Medical school is expensive for everyone. But for low-income students, the hidden costs can be prohibitive…

American medical schools are the training grounds for a white-collar, high-income industry, but they select their students from predominantly high-income, and typically white, households…Between 1988 and 2017, more than three-quarters of American medical school students came from affluent households…

Students from low-income families who choose to apply to medical school find the path lined with financial obstacles. The application phase entails MCAT registration ($315) and preparation, application fees ($170 for the first school and $40 for each additional one), travel and attire for interviews (on average more than $200 per school). After enrollment, students are expected to purchase equipment and study aids. Each year brings new certification tests, with registration fees running upward of $600.

Aspiring doctors know that tuition is costly; the median educational debt held by medical school graduates in 2018 was $200,000, up 4 percent from the previous year. But less advertised are all the hidden costs of a medical education.

Gastrostomy Tube Placement in Extremely Low Birthweight Infants

Posted on by

A recent analysis (MG Warren et al J Pediatr 2019; 214: 41-6) examined gastrostomy tube (GT) placement among 4569 extremely low birthweight (ELBW) infants (birth wt <1000 gm) who were enrolled in the National Instittue of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network (25 centers).

Key findings:

  • 333 (7.3%) underwent GT placement; 76% had GT placed postdischarge from NICU
  • Among patients with GT placement, 56% had weight <10th percentile, 61% had neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI), and 55% had chronic breathing problems
  • At last follow-up, 32% of infants who required GT placement were taking full oral feeds.
  • Rates of fundoplication varied widely between centers, ranging from 0% to 6.4% among the centers.

In the discussion, the authors note the well-recognized associations between feeding difficulties and language delays in ELBW infants.  In addition, “behavioral and emotional problems have …been described in children with feeding problems.”

The authors also state, without evidence, that the high rate of GT placement after discharge suggests that “a large proportion of ELBW infants were first discharged from the NICU orally feeding but could not maintain these skills.”  Alternative explanations include the following:

  • Many infants were sent home with NG (nasogastric) supplementation and after not making progress with oral feedings, elective GT placement was done when the infant was a more suitable candidate (eg. improved respiratory status, better nourished, etc.)
  • Problems with oral feeding became apparent after discharge including poor growth and aspiration.  In fact, the authors note that “orormotor dysfunction and avoidant feeding behaviors at 3 and 12 months corrected age” were nearly twice as likely in infants born <34 weeks
  • While this study did not fully capture data regarding home NG feedings, 14% of patients sent home with NG feedings eventually received a GT

My take: This study indicates that 7% of ELBW infants undergo GT placement and that about one-third out-grow the need for GT supplementation after ~2 years.

Related blog posts:

Transnasal Endoscopy in Unsedated Children to Monitor Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Posted on by

A recent retrospective study (N Nguyen et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 2455-2462) describe the feasibility of unsedated transnasal endoscopy (TNE) for monitoring eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) in children (n=190, subject ages 3-22 years).

TNE was facilitated by distraction with either video google or virtual reality (starting 2016).  NPO time was 2 hours before the TNE.

Key points:

  • Over 294 TNEs were completed from 300 attempts (98% success)
  • Cost of TNE was halved: $4393 compared to $9444 for EGD (does not count pathology costs)
  • Adverse events: 8 (2.7%) with vomiting, 9 (3.1%) spit up, 11 (3.7%) with epistaxis
  • By 2017, TNE accounted for 31.8% of upper endoscopies in 2017

The authors recommend that TNE be offered starting at age 5 years in those without a known stricture.

My take: I am looking forward to less invasive/less costly ways of monitoring treatment response in EoE.  I think TNE can lower costs –though I am a little surprised that the cost of TNE in their institution was still more than $4000.  In our outpatient endoscopy center, costs for an upper endoscopy/biopsy with anesthesia are typically about one-third the cost of an EGD in their study and about three-fourths the cost of a study TNE.

Related study: A Krigel et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 2489-96. This study showed increasing use of anesthesia assistance (AA) for colonoscopy in adults from 16.7% in 2006 to 58.1% in 2015. This data was derived from the Premier Perspective database with more than 4.6 million patients who had an outpatient colonoscopy. AA was associated with a median increase in cost of $182 for patients with commercial insurance.

Related blog post: Waiting for the String Test for EoE

 

Celiac Disease: “”80 percent of success is just showing up”

Posted on by

“80 percent of success is just showing up” —Woody Allen

Reading a recent (brief) study (BA Blansky et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 2503-4) reminded me of the quote from Woody Allen.  This study of children with Celiac disease (CD) demonstrates a high rate of children who were lost to follow-up at a leading Children’s hospital.

Key findings:

  • From a randomly selected retrospective cohort (2010-2014) with 241 eligible subjects, one-fourth of children were lost to follow-up within a year of diagnosis. 22 (9%) had NO GI visits after their diagnostic procedure.
  • Risk factors for loss of follow-up: sibling with CD (HR 1.90), Medicaid insurance (HR 2.19), and older age at diagnosis; those with adherence had median age at diagnosis of 8.7 years compared with 11.4 years for those lost to follow-up.
  • Median time to tissue transglutaminase (TTG) IgA normalization was 17 months.  Of 141 who had recommended follow-up, 25% had elevated TTG IgA at last GI visit.

My take: These numbers should not be surprising to most clinicians.  If clinicians want to improve follow-up and outcomes, then families will need more nudging; EMRs can be configured to help in this task.

Related blog posts:

Quebec City