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.

Vitamins: often ‘throwing money down the drain’

Posted on by

From USA Today: Medical journal: ‘Case closed’ against vitamin pills

“it’s time for most consumers to stop wasting money on multivitamins and other supplements, because they have no proven benefits and some possible harms.”

That declaration comes in a strongly worded editorial that accompanies two new studies and an expert panel’s report published Monday in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

“The message is simple: Most supplements do not prevent chronic disease or death, their use is not justified, and they should be avoided,” says the editorial, signed by two researchers from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, one British researcher and one of the journal’s senior editors…

The new results from that study will disappoint anyone who hoped a multivitamin might keep them sharp in old age. The study followed male physicians over age 65 for an average of 11 years and found multivitamins had no effect on cognitive decline…

A second, unrelated, new study in Annals found high-dose multivitamins had no effect on the progression of heart disease in heart attack survivors…

there are exceptions. For example, health officials strongly urge women of childbearing age to take folic acid, to prevent birth defects. Some ongoing studies of vitamin D, he says, are justified because some benefits…

most of the 53% of U.S. consumers who use supplements are wasting money, to the tune of $28 billion a year.

Same story from NY Times: http://t.co/kEwrk1mGyQ

Related blog entry:  Live longer -don’t take your vitamins? | gutsandgrowth

Risk of Vitamin B12 Deficiency with Persistent PPI Usage

Posted on by

From NY Times, nyti.ms/1kwQHPF :

People who use certain acid-suppressing drugs for two years or longer are at increased risk of vitamin B12 deficiency, which can lead to anemia, neurological problems or dementia, researchers reported on Tuesday.

The drugs in question are called proton-pump inhibitors, or P.P.I.’s, and histamine 2 receptor antagonists, and they are available by prescription and over the counter under brand names like Prevacid, Prilosec and Nexium. Nearly 157 million prescriptions were written for P.P.I.’s alone last year.

“People who are taking these medications are more likely than the average person to be vitamin B12 deficient, and it’s a potentially serious problem,” said Dr. Douglas A. Corley, senior author of the new study, published in The Journal of the American Medical Association. “This raises the question of whether people taking these medications for long periods should be screened for vitamin B12 deficiency.”

Dr. Corley has received funding from Pfizer, which makes a P.P.I. called Protonix.

He and his colleagues at Kaiser Permanente in Oakland, Calif., examined the medical records of 25,956 adults who received vitamin B12 deficiency diagnoses between 1997 and 2011, comparing them with 184,199 patients without B12 deficiency during that period.

Patients who took P.P.I’s for more than two years were 65 percent more likely to have a vitamin B12 deficiency, the researchers found. Higher doses of P.P.I’s were more strongly associated with the vitamin deficiency, as well.

Twelve percent of patients deficient in vitamin B12 had used P.P.I.’s for two years or more, compared with 7.2 percent of control patients. The risk of deficiency was less pronounced among patients using H2RA’s long term: 4.2 percent, compared with 3.2 percent of nonusers.

The new study is the largest to date to demonstrate a link between taking acid suppressants and vitamin B12 deficiency across age groups. Earlier small studies focused primarily on the elderly.

Robert J. Valuck, a professor of pharmacy at the University of Colorado in Aurora, was surprised that the association in the new report was strongest in adults younger than age 30. “It’s not safe to assume vitamin B12 deficiency is only an issue in the elderly,” he said.

Bottomline: patients (not just elderly) on chronic PPIs may need to be tested for vitamin B12 deficiency.

Related blog entries:

Are we missing Vitamin B12? | gutsandgrowth

It is a Question of Fairness

Posted on by

One of my professors in medical school frequently described ethical issues in terms of some things being unfair and some things being unfortunate.  A report in this month’s Liver Transplantation (2013: 19: 1330-42; editorial 1287-88) indicates that sometimes an individual does not receive a liver transplant due to an unfair allocation policy.  One potential problem with the current UNOS distribution is the use of exception points.  Because the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score does not work well for all patients, there are both recognized exceptional diagnoses (REDs) (eg. hepatocellular carcinoma) and non-REDs (eg. cholangitis).  The purpose of these exception points is to account for some conditions that may increase the risk of dying on the transplant list in which the MELD score is not an adequate predictor.

In this study of adult liver transplant candidates between 2002-2011, the authors examined non-REDs; among a cohort of 58,641, 7.4% applied for a non-RED.  The number of non-REDs increased over the course of the study.  In addition, approval rates which were <50% in 2002 increased to nearly 75% in 2010. Candidates with approved exceptions were more likely to undergo transplantation (68.3% vs. 53.4%, P <0.001).

There was significant variability among transplant centers with regard to requesting exception points. Centers with higher median MELD score at transplantation were more likely to have candidates with non-RED applications. The net result was that women, African-Americans, Hispanics, and patients with Medicaid insurance were statistically less likely to have an exception application.

In pediatrics, non-RED applications are more common. Thus, the problem of equitable distribution could be even greater among pediatric patients.

Bottomline: While physicians have a duty to their patients, it is vital to make sure that every effort is made to allocate organs in a fair manner.  Since the use of non-RED applications is inconsistent, it suggests that some transplant centers are utilizing this tool inappropriately (?too often, ?too few).  This report indicates that more work is needed to have a fair transplant allocation system.

Related blog posts:

Looking behind and looking forward in EoE (part 2)

Posted on by

While yesterday’s article was good, today’s is really forward-thinking (Gastroenterol 213; 145: 1289-99).  Last year in this blog, I reviewed the use of microRNA for studying EoE (MicroRNA signature for eosinophilic esophagitis | gutsandgrowth), this study expands on this idea with the development of the EoE diagnostic panel (EDP) which is a 96-gene quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay.

The authors (one of whom [JG] has joined our group) used this assay initially in 15 pediatric with EoE, in 14 pediatric non-EoE, and then in a subsequent cohort of 194 pediatric and adult patient samples (fresh or formalin-fixed tissue from one esophageal biopsy).  Of the latter cohort, 91 had histologically-active EoE, 57 had either non-EoE or EoE in remission, 34 were histologically-ambiguous, and 12 had reflux.

Results -first of all you have to see the results to get the best sense of how impressive they are.  Numerous figures show the EDP depictions of patients’ EoE transcriptome patterns.

  • EDP had approximately 96% sensitivity and 98% specificity; EDP’s utility could be underestimated due to limitations in the current ‘gold standard’ for diagnosis
  • EDP can distinguish EoE in remission from healthy controls as well as identify patients exposed to swallowed glucocorticoids.  Thus, with current patients in remission, the tissue may appear healthy; nevertheless, EDP identifies molecular changes in this tissue.
  • EDP can distinguish EoE from reflux

What this study means:

  1. Currently both the diagnostic standards (eg. cutoff values for eosinophils) and remission standards remain questionable.  This molecular test has the potential to raise the standard for both diagnosis and response to treatment.
  2. EDP may elucidate differences in EoE pathogenesis which could vary from patient to patient.
  3. EDP may help in prospective trials and help in clinical practice by identifying patients who are most likely to benefit from the treatments that are available.
  4. EDP may help overcome the patchy nature of eosinophil distribution.
  5. EDP serves as a model for how molecular testing could influence many inflammatory conditions including asthma, inflammatory bowel disease and biliary atresia.

While I think this study is going to be highly influential, I have one unanswered question:  how much will it cost?  In the conclusion, the authors state “the EDP offers an accurate, rapid, informative, and low-cost diagnosis.”  Yet, the authors do not elaborate on the expense of this technology.

Related blog entries:

A Cautionary Tale –Is it Medical Child Abuse?

Posted on by

From Jeff Schwimmer’s twitter feed:

A story in the Boston Globe highlighting the difficulty of differentiating Mitochondrial Disease from Medical Child Abuse; the latter term is now preferred over Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. Her gastroenterologist was involved due to stooling problems (this child underwent a cecostomy tube) and feeding issues:

b.globe.com/1b6Vy4E -part 1.

PART 2: The family battles the state.

More bad press or Boston Children’s:

‘Campaign of Terror’: One of the Best Hospitals in the …

Looking behind and looking forward in EoE (part 1)

Posted on by

Two important articles are provide additional insight into eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

In the first (Gastroenterol 2013; 145: 1230-36), the authors performed a retrospective review of the Swiss EoE Database (SEED). This SEED should not be confused with our SEED center (Home- The SEED Center of Atlanta– SouthEast Eosinophilic …).  While the database contains 783 EoE patients, only 200 who were followed by the senior author and had complete data were included.  The enrollment period dates back to 1989.

Demographics: 153 men, mean age 39 years old, 94.5% had dysphagia at time of diagnosis and 35.5% had chest pain.  66% had concomitant allergies.

Terminology: The authors defined strictures as low-grade if a standard 9 mm endoscope could pass but met resistance, intermediate if a 6 mm endoscope could pass, and high-grade if it could not be passed with a 6 mm endoscope.

Results:

  • 37.5% (n=75) had strictures (other endoscopic findings noted in Table 2)
  • Peak eosinophil count (median): 35 proximally and 28 distally
  • Figure 2 showed the evolution of endoscopic features based on diagnostic delay.  With increasing diagnostic delay, there developed a preponderance of a mixed fibrotic/inflammatory picture whereas in those whose symptoms were of much shorter duration, the endoscopic features were often inflammatory without fibrosis.
  • For example, if diagnostic delay was between 0-2 years, then fibrotic findings were noted in 46.5%; in contrast, 87.5% had fibrotic features if symptoms had been present for > 20 years.
  • Strictures increased from 17.2% in those without significant diagnostic delay to 70.8% in those with symptoms present for > 20 years.
  • The authors note that diagnostic delay was greatest in those who developed symptoms in the first decade of life.

Study limitations: The categorization of strictures is straightforward; however, newer tools like the EndoFlip can detect esophageal narrowing more accurately.  Other limitations are related to retrospective nature of study and its reliance on patient’s reported outcomes (subject to recall bias).  Thus, the estimation of diagnostic delay may be inaccurate.

Take home message:

This article reinforces the concept that the presentation of EoE changes with time and that the long-term consequence of untreated EoE is increasing fibrosis and stricturing of the esophagus.

Related blog entries:

Electronic Order Sets Can Improve Care

Posted on by

It is recognized that checklists can improve medical care as well as help you remember to pick up butter when you go shopping.  So, it is not surprising that a standardized electronic order set can improve patient care.  A recent prospective observational study has shown that implementation of an electronic order set improved the care of 123 patients with cirrhosis who presented with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 11: 1342-1348).

This study was conducted from 2011 to 2012.

Key findings:

  • Administration of antibiotics increased in patients in whom the order set was used: 100% compared with 89%. A previous Cochrane meta-analysis has noted a mortality risk reduction of nearly 20% in patients who received prophylactic antibiotics in this setting.
  • Order set usage was associated with quicker administration of antibiotics: 3h28min compared with 10h4min.
  • Time for octreotide administration was reduced in patients with the order set: 2h16min vs 6h21min.
  • Mortality was not reduced in this study by using an order set.  In fact, in those who used an order set there were 7 mortalities (out of 61) compared with only 2 mortalities (out of 62) who did not use order sets.

Order set use was at the discretion of the treating physician.  This could have led to selection bias.

Bottomline: Use of a standardized order set improved adherence and timeliness of recommended therapies.

Related blog posts:

What the “Post-Antibiotic Age” Really Means

Posted on by

From the following site: When We Lose Antibiotics, Here’s Everything Else We’ll … – Wired

An excerpt:

If we really lost antibiotics to advancing drug resistance — and trust me, we’re not far off — here’s what we would lose. Not just the ability to treat infectious disease; that’s obvious.

But also: The ability to treat cancer, and to transplant organs, because doing those successfully relies on suppressing the immune system and willingly making ourselves vulnerable to infection. Any treatment that relies on a permanent port into the bloodstream — for instance, kidney dialysis. Any major open-cavity surgery, on the heart, the lungs, the abdomen. Any surgery on a part of the body that already harbors a population of bacteria: the guts, the bladder, the genitals. Implantable devices: new hips, new knees, new heart valves. Cosmetic plastic surgery. Liposuction. Tattoos.

We’d lose the ability to treat people after traumatic accidents, as major as crashing your car and as minor as your kid falling out of a tree. We’d lose the safety of modern childbirth: Before the antibiotic era, 5 women died out of every 1,000 who gave birth. One out of every nine skin infections killed. Three out of every 10 people who got pneumonia died from it.

And we’d lose, as well, a good portion of our cheap modern food supply. Most of the meat we eat in the industrialized world is raised with the routine use of antibiotics, to fatten livestock and protect them from the conditions in which the animals are raised.

Related posts:

GIKids Resource

Posted on by

For those of you who have not visited GIKids.org website:

GIKids – A Resource for Pediatric Digestive Disorders

It has literally A-Z handouts on pediatric GI problems for families, including four new handouts:

Educated or Misinformed –Leading to Hemorrhagic Disease of the Newborn

Posted on by

“Hemorrhagic Disease of the Newborn,” now termed “Vitamin K Deficient Bleeding,” has reemerged as a problem. Many well-intentioned parents are refusing vitamin K to keep things more ‘natural’ for their infants.  This phenomenon is likely encouraged by some alternative health websites and other parents; babies who are breastfed are at increased risk of vitamin K deficiency (without prophylaxis).  Unfortunately, they are playing Russian roulette with their infant’s safety. In addition, many practitioners will not readily recognize this disorder because of the effectiveness of Vitamin K prophylaxis that has been provided since 1961.

An excerpt from the St. Louis Dispatch provides more information: Four babies hemorrhage after parents refuse vitamin K shot, a practice on the rise

Maternity care providers here and nationwide are on high alert for life-threatening vitamin K deficiencies in newborns, at the same time they are seeing more parents refusing a routine preventive injection.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a report last month about four babies in Nashville, Tenn., who hemorrhaged after their parents refused vitamin K injections at birth. The babies were diagnosed with life-threatening vitamin K deficiency bleeding between February and September. Three had bleeding in the brain, and one had gastrointestinal bleeding. They survived, but the infants with brain hemorrhages could have long-term neurological problems.

“Not giving vitamin K at birth is an emerging trend that can have devastating outcomes for infants and their families,” CDC director Dr. Tom Frieden stated in the report. “Ensuring that every newborn receives a vitamin K injection at birth is critical to protect infants.”

The vitamin is necessary for normal blood clotting, but because vitamin K does not transfer well across the placenta, most babies are born with low levels. The deficiency can lead to a rare, sudden bleeding disorder up to 6 months of age.

The CDC investigation found that parents refused the injection for several reasons, including a concern about an increased risk for cancer from the injection, an impression that it was unnecessary and a desire to minimize exposure to “toxins.” A 1992 study associated vitamin K and childhood leukemia, but the findings have been debunked by subsequent studies…

The number of parents refusing is more alarming at birth centers, which provide care led by midwives who support natural birth. Among the most recent 75 births at the Birth and Wellness Center in O’Fallon, Mo., 23 percent refused the injection, and 14 percent opted for the oral dose, said Jessica Henman, the center’s certified nurse midwife.

The CDC studied a random sample of births this year in the Nashville, Tenn., area and found that parents of 3.4 percent of 3,080 newborns discharged from hospitals had refused the vitamin K injection, while parents of 28 percent of 218 born at birth centers had refused…

A newborn not getting the injection is 81 times more likely to get the late form of the disorder than a baby who gets the shot, according to the CDC. [my emphasis in bold]

Related link from Stanford:  Guidelines for Vitamin K Prophylaxis – Newborn Nursery at LPCH

Bottomline: When seeing an infant with bleeding, ask about vitamin K prophylaxis after birth.

If a parent caused intracranial hemorrhage in an infant by shaking the infant, they would probably be jailed.  What should be done in these cases?

Related blog post:

Bleeding due to vitamin K deficiency | gutsandgrowth