Will salt intake make you fat?

Maybe.  According to a recent study (Pediatrics 2013; 131: 14-20), salt intake is associated with consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB); hence, it might make you fat.

This cross-sectional study used data (4283 participants, ages 2-16 years) from the 2007 Australian National Children’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey.  Calculation of dietary intake (salt, fluid, sugary beverages) was determined by looking at two 24-hour dietary recalls.

Each gram of salt was associated with a 46 gram intake of fluid.  Of those who took SSB (n=2571), salt intake was associated with increased consumption of SSB; each gram of salt was associated with a 17 gram increased intake of SSB.  Participants with SSB intake of more than 1 serving (≥250 g), in turn, were 26% more likely to be overweight/obese (odds ratio 1.26).

Study limitations included the following:

  • 24-hour dietary recalls which likely underrepresented salt intake
  • Salt intake may be clustered with other ‘unhealthy’ dietary habits.  Thus, it may be a marker for undesirable diet rather than a causal factor.

Conclusion: Besides lowering blood pressure and lowering the risk of kidney stones, reducing salt intake may help with obesity prevention.

Related blog post:

Are we missing Vitamin B12?

This is the question that I wonder after reading a recent review (NEJM 2013; 368: 149-60) -especially since effective treatment is readily available.

While vitamin B12 deficiency is most common in individuals 70 to 80 years, it affects all age groups.  A particularly vulnerable group are infants of mothers with vitamin B12 deficiency.  These infants may be born with deficiency or it may develop if exclusively breast-fed, usually between 4 and 6 months of age.  Indications of this deficiency include failure of brain development, poor growth, hypotonia, and feeding difficulties.  Some infants develop tremors, lethargy, and hyperirritability.  Imaging may show atrophy and delayed myelination.

Mothers who are at most risk:

  • unrecognized pernicious anemia
  • history of gastric bypass
  • short gut syndrome
  • long-term vegetarian or vegan diet

Other pediatric conditions that cause B12 deficiency: ileal resections, Imerslund-Grasbeck syndrome (ImerslundGräsbeck syndrome (selective vitamin B12 malabsorption ..), inflammatory bowel disease, and pernicious anemia.

Other Key Points from this review:

  • B12 deficiency causes reversible megaloblastic anemia, demyelinating neurologic disease or both
  • B12 deficiency is the major cause of hyperhomocysteinemia in countries with folate-fortified food and contributes to a risk of vascular disease and thrombosis
  • Autoimmune gastritis (pernicious anemia) is the most common cause of severe deficiency (in adults).  Tests to determine underlying reason for B12 deficiency include the following: anti-intrinsic factor antibodies (must be checked off treatment for at least 7 days), anti-parietal cell antibodies -both help detect pernicious anemia, gastrin level (high level) & pepsinogen I (low levels) both suggestive of atrophic gastritis.  The Schilling test of radioactive B12 is no longer available.  Endoscopy is frequently performed in adults with B12 deficiency.
  • Methylmalonic acid (MMA) is the best indicator for untreated B12 deficiency; MMA >400 nmol/L has 98% sensitivity for B12 deficiency.  Other causes of increased MMA include renal failure and volume depletion.
  • Serum B12 has poor sensitivity and specificity -though performs adequately at higher cut-off value (<350pg/mL has 90% sensitivity)
  • Many individuals require lifelong treatment with either parenteral B12 or high-dose oral tablets (see article for dosing recommendations)

Additional references:

  • -J Pediatr 2010; 157: 162.  B12 deficiency in newborns –especially if mother has had bariatric surgery or vegan diet.
  • -J Pediatr 2001; 138: 10 (review) At risk for deficiency: strict veggie, abnl absorption (gastric resection, pernicious anemia), long term PPI, bacterial overgrowth, ileal disruption (Crohn’s), or ileal receptor d/o (Imersund-Grasbeck),  inborn B12 metabolism d/o

Clinical Sx: FTT, weakness, anorexia, neuro/psych sx, macrocytic anemia, pancytopenia, glossitis, vomit/diarrhea

Dx: low vit B12, incr methylmalonic acid & incr homocysteine.  MMA specific for B12; homocysteine incr also if folate deficient.

If Vit B12 deficient, reason for this needs to be determined.

One year later

It has been one year and 300 posts since I’ve started this blog.  I’ve enjoyed putting together my thoughts about recent articles.  In addition, I like being able to search for previous blogs for information that I find helpful.

Currently there are close to ~35 hits per day in addition to the email/wordpress followers (about 30).  This number has been increasing and it is fascinating to see that people from all over the world will sometimes stumble across this blog.

If you have suggestions for topics, articles or other ways to improve this pediatric GI blog, please send me an email at jjhochman@gmail.com.

NASPGHAN Postgraduate Course 2012

Postgraduate course syllabus: naspghn.informz.net/

So far I’ve looked at the first few talks from the postgraduate course syllabus (see link above), including CVS slides by B Li.  Several good pointers are given.  For example, for abortive therapy, he recommends use of Zofran 0.3 mg/kg/dose.  Page 17 of course book details preventative measures.  Also, with regard to amitriptyline, he recommends starting at 0.3 mg/kg and titrating as needed up to 1-1.5 mg/kg/day.  Mitochondrial-type support often helpful as well (eg. CoQ10 10 mg/kg/day divided BID).

At the end of this lecture are a couple of questions –see how you do:

  1. Which NASPGHAN Consensus diagnostic criteria for CVS is the most specific?
    1. positive family history of migraine
    2. vomiting at least 4 times/hour at peak
    3. well between episodes of vomiting
    4. each attack resembles the others
    5. associated pallor and listlessness
  2. All of the potential mechanisms below have been implicated in CVS except:
    1. HPA axis activation
    2. migraine vascular changes
    3. autonomic nervous dysfunction
    4. mitochondrial dysfunction
    5. serotonin receptor polymorphisms

page22image7408 page22image7568

3. NASPGHAN recommended evaluation of a child with episodic vomiting:

  1. a. electrolytes, BUN, Cr
  1. electrolytes, BUN, Cr & UGI
  2. electrolytes, BUN, Cr, UGI & ultrasound
  3. electrolytes, BUN, Cr, UGI, ultrasound & endoscopy
  4. electrolytes, BUN, Cr, UGI, ultrasound, endoscopy & MRI
  1. Which is the best initial approach to the 11 year old child with CVS who has failed multiple medications and missed 4 weeks of school?
    1. consult psychology for anxiety and stressors
    2. redo all laboratory and radiographic testing
    3. consider induced sleep in the PICU
    4. hospitalize and observe teenager in episode
    5. add a second prophylactic medication
  2. Which statement best applies to the preventative approach to CVS?
    1. step‐wise increases in medicines are rarely required
    2. life style modifications are not recommended
    3. after anti‐migraine agents, anticonvulsants are used
    4. toddlers should receive propranolol first line
    5. topirimate does not cause cognitive dysfunction

    Answers: 1. d;2.e;3.b;4.a;5.c

Foreign body talk: if object >2cm or longer than 5 cm, may have difficulty passing.

Also a link to the meeting notes and abstracts:
naspghan.org/wmspage.cfm?parm1=723 …

NASPGHAN POSTGRADUATE COURSE Table of Contents

MODULE A: WHAT GOES IN, MUST COME OUT: CLINICAL GASTROINTESTINAL ISSUES

FROM PROPRANOLOL TO INDUCING COMA: CARING FOR A CHILD WITH INTRACTABLE CYCLIC VOMITING SYNDROME (CVS)………………………13 INCONTINENCE WITHOUT FECAL IMPACTION    …………………………….23 ELIMINATION DIETS: RISKS AND BENEFITS……………………………………..37

MODULE B: LIVER BEYOND VIRUS, METABOLIC, STORAGE, TUMORS

METABOLIC LIVER DISEASE: WORKING THROUGH THE MAZE ……………….51 UPDATE ON ALPHA‐1‐ANTITRYPSIN DEFICIENCY         ……………………………61 THERE IS A LIVER MASS ON THE ULTRASOUND: WHERE DO YOU GO FROM HERE? ….75

MODULE C: THE INFLAMED INTESTINE

GI INFLAMMATION, IMMUNE FUNCTION AND IBD          ………………………………87 MY STOMACH IS BUGGING ME!: THE MICROBIOME IN IRRITABLE BOWEL SYNDROME ……………………………………………………………………………………………101                                                                                                THE SORE BOTTOM: PERIANAL INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE         ……111 RESCUE ME FROM MY IBD: UPDATES ON INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE THERAPY ………………………………………………………………………………………………125

MODULE D: IMAGING AND ACCESSING THE TUBES

LOOKING DEEPLY INTO THE NOT SO SMALL INTESTINE ……………………………..137 PUTTING TUBES WITHIN TUBES: ENTERAL THERAPEUTIC ACCESS    ………….151 IMAGING THE PANCREATO‐BILIARY TREE                …………………………………….169 UPDATE ON CRITICAL FOREIGN BODY INGESTIONS  ………………………………….189

MODULE E: WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS: LIVER, INTESTINE AND POUCH

THE KID IS ON THE LIST: KEEPING COMPLICATIONS AT BAY FOR THE
NON‐TRANSPLANT HEPATOLOGIST ……………………………………………………201 TRICKS OF THE TRADE FOR INTESTINAL FAILURE ……………………………….213 GASTROINTESTINAL AND LIVER COMPLICATIONS OF BONE MARROW TRANSPLANT                                                                    …………………………225 POUCH DYSFUNCTION AND SURVEILLANCE: WHAT ARE MY OPTIONS? .235

GI & Nutrition Problems in Rett Syndrome

A nationwide survey of 983 patients with Rett syndrome identifies a high prevalence of GI and nutritional problems (Motil KJ et al. JPGN 2012; 55: 292-98).

Parents from 983 female patients with Rett syndrome responded to the study questionnaire; this was a 59% response rate from the 1666 families in the North American Rett Database.  Patients included those who fulfilled clinical criteria for diagnosis or who had MECP2 gene (methyl-CpG-binding-protein).

Prevalence of GI problems were listed in article’s Table 2 and included the following:

  • Gastrointestinal problems 92%
  • Feeding problems 81%
  • Constipation 80%
  • Poor weight gain 38%
  • Gastroesophageal reflux 39%

Z-scores for height-for-age, weight-for-age, and BMI are presented for ages 0-40 (see Table 1) -these are all significantly lower than age-matched healthy children.

Important findings:

  • Surgical interventions were common: 11% had fundoplication, 28% gastrostomy, 3% and cholecystectomy
  • Many gastrointestinal symptoms improved with age.  However, short stature, gastrostomy tube, and bone health issues were more common in older patients.
  • Bone fractures are 3- to 4-fold higher than in healthy children

Addtional references:

  • -J Pediatr 2010; 156: 135.  Longevity in Rett syndrome –about 1/2 survive to age 40.
  • -Ann Neurol 2010; 68: 944-50.  Rett diagnostic criteria
  • -JPGN 2007; 45: 582-90.  Growth/feeding issues in Rett syndrome

Gluten avoidance -quite common

In a pediatric Boston cohort of 579 patients presenting for celiac evaluation but no previous diagnosis, 7.4% had previous gluten avoidance (J Pediatr 2012; 161: 471-5). In this cohort, the mean age at presentation was 8.7 years.

Independent predictors of gluten avoidance and the odds ratio (OR) included the following:

  • Irritability OR 3.2
  • Family history of celiac OR 2.2
  • Diarrhea OR 2.5
  • Pervasive developmental disorder OR 5.3

From my perspective, many families and sometimes referring physicians are convinced that their child has celiac disease before subspecialty evaluation. While a gluten-free diet may reduce some gastrointestinal symptoms even in the absence of celiac disease, it is probably helpful for families to complete diagnostic testing and to obtain dietary counseling prior to implementing a gluten-free diet.

Previous related blog entries:

Better growth charts for preterm children

A community-based cohort study from the Netherlands involving 1690 preterm infants (25-36 weeks) and a random sample of 634 full term infants provides a more precise tool for monitoring growth over the first four years of life (J Pediatr 2012; 161: 460-5).

Key findings:

  • The lower the gestational age, the lower the median value for both weight and height.  A quick glance at their tables indicate that infants born at 25 weeks gestation remained on average about 2 kg and 4 cm smaller than full term infants.  Infants born at 32 weeks gestation were on average about 1 kg and 2 cm smaller through the study period.
  • The absolute differences in weight and height were nearly constant, indicating that there was a lack of ‘catch-up’ growth.  At the same time, a child ‘following his own curve’ parallel to growth curve is likely a normal pattern
  • Head circumference at the end of the first year was similar between preterm and term infants
  • Greater variability was noted in boys

While this study did not adjust for maternal height, it is known that short maternal height does correlate with increased likelihood of short offspring.  This is partly mediated by having a small for gestational age birth.  Other limitations of the study included that the cohort was >90% Caucasian, and there was no adjustment for multiple births.

Useful links/references:

  • Growth Charts – Homepage -CDC growth charts
  • Pediatrics 2011; 128: e1187-94.  Growth and predictors of growth restraint in moderately preterm-born children.
  • Pediatrics 2003; 112: e30-8.  Growth of preterm infants during 1st 20 years.

Closer followup for Celiac disease & pediatric guidelines

Data from the Mayo clinic indicate that Celiac patients are not followed up adequately (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 10: 893-99).

Data was extracted on 122 patients from Olmsted County.  Due to the Rochester Epidemiology Project, a comprehensive medical record is available for the entire county population (since 1966).

Results:

  • At 1 year following diagnosis, 41% of patients had followup visits; 89% within 5 years.
  • At followup visits, gluten-fee diet compliance was assessed in 33.6% and 79.8% respectively at 1 and 5 years.
  • The minority met with a dietician: 3.3% and 15.8% respectively at 1 and 5 years.
  • Serological followup was performed in 22.1% and 65.6% respectively at 1 and 5 years.

The related editorial (pages 900-901) makes the point that quality follow-up and outcomes would be aided by clear guidelines.  General guidelines in our practice are noted below.

When I review lists of patients with specific diagnoses, I am often surprised by the lack of follow-up for a number of conditions, not just celiac disease.  Developing a system to remind patients about follow-up for a wide range of conditions would be a worthwhile goal for pediatric practices.

Additional references/blog entries:

General Guidelines in our practice (developed by Dr. Jeff Lewis in 2009)
1. Who to test
There is a wide spectrum of clinical presentation from the classical malabsorption to a number of non-GI presentations.  Some studies suggest that the frequency of celiac in a peds GI clinic is as high as 1:40 (general population is 1:130).  Presentations that are common other than diarrhea, distention or FTT include constipation, anemia, abdominal pain, intussception, vomiting, short stature abnormal LFT’s, pancreatitis, and asymptomatic detection upon screening.  30% of newly diagnosed patients are overweight.  There is about a 5% risk in 1st and 2nd degree relatives, patients with type I DM, Down syndrome, and thyroiditis.  In 300 pediatric patients over 9 years, 10% presented with diarrhea, 20% abdominal pain, 23% as a result of screening, 5% with constipation, and 26% with growth issues.  Rates in family members include 1st degree relative 5 – 10%, MZ twins – 75% concordance rate, DZ twins – 10% concordance rate and HLA identical sibs – 30% concordance rate.

Recommend: Think about celiac disease with a variety of GI symptoms including those present in overweight patients.  Screen asymptomatic patients with Down’s, William’s syndrome, Type I DM, Thyroiditis, and in patients who are family members of celiac patients.

2. How to Test

Serology: Under age 3 years (some say 2 years) there is consensus that to consider including antigliadin IgA and AGA IgG along with anti-TTG and quantitative IgA.  Over age 3, anti-TTG and quantitative IgA should suffice but many are recommending also ordering EMA.  There is good evidence that anti-TTG assays vary from lab to lab.  There is also good evidence that anti-TTG in an individual may fluctuate over time.  Patients in the Teddy study (The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY …) have had abnormal anti-TTG followed by normal levels on the next blood draw.  17/82 had a positive anti-TTG convert to a negative on a regular diet and remain negative at all follow-ups.  For purposes of the Teddy study, two consecutive abnormal anti-TTG over 0.5 should be the threshold for EGD.  EGD after one abnormal TTG in the asymptomatic screened individual, may be too soon and lead to a false sense of security.  In a patient on a GF diet, testing serology may still be useful if the GF diet is less than 6 months.  HLA typing may help rule out celiac in patients on GF diet.

Gluten exposure prior to biopsy: There is no consensus on how long a patient needs to be back on gluten before testing but most experts suggest at least a month and some 2 or more months.

Biopsy is still considered essential in confirming the diagnosis.  Some studies suggest that some patients (2 to 3% of kids and perhaps adults) may show abnormalities in the bulb but not in the 2nd or 3rd portion of the duodenum.

Recommend:  anti-TTG and IgA will catch most patients with celiac.  Under age 3, consider obtaining AGA IgG and AGA IgA.  Addition of EMA may increase sensitivity of the anti-TTG.  Biopsy is still considered by celiac experts to be essential for the diagnosis.  At least 6 duodenal biopsies are recommended.  Some recommend 4 additional biopsies from the duodenal bulb. HLA testing has a role (mostly in excluding the possibility of celiac) though there are rare patients (about 1 in 100 celiac patients though some report much less) that are DQ2 and DQ8 negative.  Not all labs test for the beta chain and this can lead to a false negative HLA DQ2.

3. When might scoping not be necessary?

There is no expert consensus on this. If serology and symptoms are highly suggestive of celiac in a patient with a first degree relative with celiac disease, it is reasonable to make a diagnosis without endoscopic exam.  To confirm diagnosis, it is helpful to see the antibody levels fall on a GF diet (usually retest after 6 months).  Some studies have shown lower compliance rates in patients without biopsy proven celiac.

Recommend:  It is a personal MD:patient:parent decision as to diagnosing celiac without a scope.  If you do diagnose without biopsy, make sure that serology improves on a GF diet.  Celiac centers standard of care still includes biopsy all newly diagnosed patients.
4.Treatment once the diagnosis is made

NIH consensus conference on celiac recommends:1) treatment include referral to a trained dietician (Atlantametroceliacs.com lists nutritionists for adults)  2) availability of a community support group – georgiarock.org or email to celiacgroup@ccdhc.org 3) follow-up with an MD experienced with celiac. 3) lifelong adherence to gluten-free diet 4) identification and treatment of nutritional deficiencies 4) follow-up with an MD familiar with celiac ideally as part of a multidisciplinary team (primarily in partnership with nutritionist).

Recommend:  All newly diagnosed patients or those struggling with compliance should see a specially trained dietician.  You can also refer to the ROCK group – georgiarock.org or celiacgroup@ccdhc.org  You should see the patient in follow-up after diagnosis.
5. Follow-up

Follow up frequency varies widely from every 3 months after initial diagnosis with a nutritionist and an MD to lesser intervals.  Once well controlled, many experts recommend annual visits, some every 2 years.  At diagnosis it is often recommended to look for deficiencies in iron, folate, vitamin D and B12.  Patients are also at risk for other fat soluble vitamin deficiencies and zinc deficiency.  Bone mineral density is often performed one year after diagnosis with abnormalities referred to endocrinology – recommendations in pediatrics are still in debate.  As patients with celiac are at substantial risk for other autoimmune disorders, it is worth considering thryoid problems (eg. check TSH and free T4) early on after diagnosis and once every 1 to 2 years though this practice is of debatable cost effectiveness.  It can take up to a year for the anti-TTG to normalize but it should be coming down significantly in 6 months.

Recommend:  At time of diagnosis, usually a CBC should be obtained to allow you to look for clues about iron, folate, and B12.  It is not unreasonable to check 25 OH Vitamin D levels as well.  At least yearly follow-up labs should include an anti-TTG but may also include TSH, free T4, Vitamin D and a CBC.  Screening for folate, B12, and iron deficiency may also be considered.  Follow up closely after diagnosis can be helpful in dealing with the stress of a major life change and to ensure compliance and understanding of the disease.

6. Testing family members

It is clear that 1st and 2nd degree family members – with and without symptoms are at high risk.  Offering to screen siblings and parents once a diagnosis is made is reasonable due to risks associated with celiac disease.  If an at risk patient screens negative with serology, it does not mean that they can not get celiac disease in the future.  Some experts recommend retesting every few years or sooner if there are symptoms.  It is important to document that you recommended screening to 1st degree relatives.

Recommend:  Strongly recommend that symptomatic first degree relatives be screened for celiac disease.  It is reasonable and helpful to offer to do the screening of parents and siblings yourself.  There is good data that it is important to screen asymptomatic people at risk as there are increased risks in adults of developing cancers, auto-immune conditions, anemia, and osteoporosis in untreated celiac disease.  There are no good recommendations for retesting at risk individuals who initially test negative. HLA typing, if negative, can be useful in eliminating the need for routine rescreening.

7. Feeding infant siblings

A multicenter trial is underway to try to determine the best time to introduce gluten to genetically at risk individuals.  There is good evidence that breast-feeding can be protective.  There is good evidence that introducing small amounts of gluten while still breast-feeding may be protective.  There is good evidence that introduction of gluten before four months of age may increase the risk of developing celiac.  Some evidence exists that the best practice is to give a teaspoon of a gluten containing cereal a few time a week between 4 and 6 months of age (Scandinavian data and prospective data out of the Denver diabetes trial).  Fassano suggests that there may be benefit in keeping the infant gluten-free for the 1st year of life and introduce while still brest feeding after a year of age.  Final answer is still pending.  Gluten can be found intact in human breast milk but not cow’s milk.  No recommendations regarding mother’s diet while breastfeeding a patient with or at risk of getting celiac are available.

Recommend: Do not introduce gluten to at risk infants before 4 moths of age.  Support breast-feeding as something that may delay or even prevent the development of celiac disease.  There is some data to suggest that tolerance may be more likely of small amounts (1 tsp a day) of gluten containing food are introduced between 4 and 6 months of age.  During breast-feeding, a mother who does not have celiac may eat gluten during the pregnancy and throughout infancy.

How helpful are probiotics?

Nobody really knows.  Claims about their efficacy are often based on poorly designed studies.  Efficacy of each strain for specific conditions and with specific dosing is often lacking.  One recent negative study demonstrates that probiotics are often not beneficial (J Pediatr 2012; 161: 40-3).

In this randomized, double-blind placebo controlled study of 106 Polish children (1-48 months of age), Lactobacillus reuteri had no effect in preventing nosocomial diarrhea in patients admitted for non-diarrheal illnesses.  While the authors contemplate that this could be due to the strain of probiotic chosen or the dose, it is clear that evidence that probiotics prevent infectious diarrhea “is still scant.”

This conclusion is backed by a large meta-analysis (JAMA 2012; 307: 1959-69).  While the study concludes that the use of probiotics is associated with a lower risk of antibiotic-associate diarrhea (RR 0.58), it predicted that the number to treat for one person to benefit would be 13.  The study was based on a systematic review of 82 randomized clinical studies.  Yet, overall the quality of the research was considered low; the studies were often had shortcomings:

  • 59 studies “lacked adequate information to assess the overall risk of bias”
  • 64 did not indicate if treatment randomization was blinded
  • 31 did not report an intent-to-treat analysis
  • 41 did not include a calculation of the study’s statistical power to detect differences
  • 17 trials were industry-sponsored and 52 did not clarify their funding/potential conflicts of interest
  • 59 did not report on adverse events specifically related to probiotic use; few trials addressed the risk of fungemia or sepsis
  • Trials rarely specified antibiotic agents; thus, it is difficult to know if a particular probiotic would be better with certain types of antibiotic therapy or duration.

Additional references/links:

  • Potential and pitfalls of probiotics with necrotizing enterocolitis
  • -JPGN 2010; 51:24. VSL#3 helpful for IBS, n=509 (4-18yr olds). 1 per day for <11yr, 2/day in 12-18yr olds
  • -Pediatrics 2008; 121:e850. Culturelle, during pregnancy and early infancy, not effective in preventing atopic dermatitis. Did increase wheezing.
  • -J Pediatr 2008; 152: 801. Probiotic helped reduce colic sx in 30 preterm infants, Lactobacillus reuteri
  • -Pediatrics 2007; 119; e124. Probiotics reduced colic in breastfed babies more than simethicone. n=83, Lactobacillus reuteri, 10-8th power per day. Decreased crying 18 minutes per day at 1 week compared to simethicone & by 94 minutes/day at 4 weeks (95% response vs 7% of simethicone)
  • -Neurogastroenterol Motili 2007 (Quigley EM, et al), 19: 166-72. Review of probiotics and IBS.
  • -NASPGHAN 2007, author: Brian Dunlap, H. Yu, Y Elitsur. abstract -most commercial yogurts have LOW concentrations of probiotics.
  • -JPGN 2006; 43: 550. Review of probiotics for specific conditions.
  • -J Pediatr 2006; 149: 367. Probiotics reduce risk of antibiotic assoc diarrhea. If 7 pts (on abx) are treated with probiotics, one fewer will develop AAD.
  • -JPGN 2006; 42: 454. Evidenced-based review of probiotics.
  • -Pediatrics 2005; 115: 1-4 & 171 editorial.  Probiotics decreased NEC in this study.
  • -Gastroenterol 2004; 126: 1620-33.  Review of probiotics, prebiotics and antibiotics in IBD.

Clues about constipation and more than 2.5 million views

A recent article identifies some important factors contributing to constipation in Hong Kong children (JPGN 2012; 55: 56-61).

Using a territory-wide questionnaire in 2318, Hong Kong Chinese elementary school students, the authors identified several factors associated with constipation which was present in 12.2% of this cohort:

  • Refusal to pass bowel movements at school (OR 1.97).  In Hong Kong, students spend >8 hours per day at school.
  • Having dinner with one/both parents <50% of time (OR 1.52).  May indicate less time with parents and less parental prompting.
  • Nighttime sleep <7 hours (OR 1.87).  This is postulated to be related to increased homework and more stress which may affect gut motility.
  • Frequent fast food consumption (OR 1.14).  This may be associated with less fiber intake.

On a tangential note, one of my sons informed me of “bad lip reading” on YouTube; some of these clips are really funny.  Since there was one relevant to the subject at hand, with over 2.5 million views, I’ve provided a link:

“Everybody Poops” – a bad lip reading of the Black Eyed Peas …

Additional blog entries related to constipation:

Stimulants for constipation

Diagnostic tests hardly ever help patients poop

It’s worth the cost

Think twice about checking thyroid