#NASPGHAN19 Liver Symposium Notes (Part 1)

Although I was unable to attend this year’s liver symposium at NASPGHAN19, I reviewed the lecture notes.  There is some terrific content.  Here are some of the slides (borrowed with permission from NASPGHAN).

Link to complete NASPGHAN Chronic Liver Disease Symposium 2019

Session I

How do I best evaluate a cholestatic infant? Sanjiv Harpavat MD Texas Children’s Hospital 

Related blog post: What is the evidence that biliary atresia starts in utero?

As for this algorithm, in my opinion, the 1st step needs to be to exclude emergencies associated with infantile cholestasis: coagulopathy, hypoglycemia, sepsis, and checking urine for reducing substances (cow’s milk formula can worsen liver disease if galactosemia is present). Subsequently, evaluation needs to proceed quickly to determine the etiology.

How do I interpret genetic results?  Saul J. Karpen MD, PhD, Emory University School of Medicine/Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta

What do abnormal liver enzyme levels mean in a tween?  William F. Balistreri MD, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center

What do I do with this abnormal radiology finding? Jean Molleston MD, Riley Children’s Hospital

I have not selected slides from Dr. Molleston’s handout –the images are terrific.  For most of the problems that are presented, the lecture notes do not provide specific recommendations for management.

Disclaimer: NASPGHAN/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. The discussion, views, and recommendations as to medical procedures, choice of drugs and drug dosages herein are the sole responsibility of the authors. Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the Society 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. Some of the slides reproduced in this syllabus contain animation in the power point version. This cannot be seen in the printed version.

 

 

Quantifying the Risk of Autoimmunity for Celiac Disease

A recent study (MR Khan et al. JPGN 2019; 69: 438-42) examined the rates of autoimmune disorders (AD) among patients with celiac disease (CD) (n=249) compared to a control group (n=498) over an 18 year period (1997-2015). The authors utilized the  a database of medical records via the Rochester Epidemiology Project (Mayo Clinic/Olmstead County).

Key findings:

  • Five years after the index date, 5.0% of CD patients and 1.3% of controls had a de novo AD diagnosis
  • In the pediatric age group, there was an increased risk of AD: 5/83 (7.3%) of CD patients and 0/179 (0%) developed a AD diagnosis at the 5-year mark
  • The authors note that they observed a lower rate of Hashimoto thyroiditis after the diagnosis of CD, likely indicating a protective role of a gluten-free diet
  • Thyroid disorders, type 1 DM, psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis were the most common AD identified in patients with CD

Limitations:

  • Retrospective study
  • Adherence with GFD was not assessed

My take: Screening for AD periodically is worthwhile in patients with CD, particularly thyroid disorders and type 1 diabetes which accounted for ~80% of the autoimmune conditions identified.

Briefly noted: R Ahawat et al. JPGN 2019; 69: 449-54. In this study with 38 newly-diagnosed CD, the authors found a high prevalence of low vitamin D (25OHD) levels (65.8%) -defined as <30 ng/mL; however, the control population had a higher rate of 79.3%.  While the authors advocate checking vitamin D levels due to the risk of bone disease, it is noted that bone mineral density and vitamin deficiencies frequently improve with a gluten-free diet (Related post: Celiac studies)

Related posts:

Barcelona

“When is Celiac Disease Celiac Disease?”

A recent study (R Auricchio et al. Gastroenterol 2019; 157: 413-20, and editorial PR Green S Guandalini, pg 293-4) provides insight into the topic of “potential celiac disease.”

It is difficult trying to explain the concept of potential celiac disease (CD) to families.  Potential CD refers to the situation of having positive celiac serology but normal duodenal mucosa. In this study, the authors prospectively followed 280 children (age 2-18 yrs) with 2 consecutive abnormal serological tests (anit-TG2, EMA) along with normal duodenal architecture who continued a diet containing gluten.

Key findings:

  • 42 (15%) developed villous atrophy at median followup of 60 months
  • 89 (32%) became serologically-negative for CD
  • Cumulative incidence of progression to villous atrophy was 43% at 12 years.
  • The strongest predictive factor for villous atrophy was age: 7% of children less than 3 years developed flat mucosa, compared with 51% for age 3-10 and 55% for those older than 10 years

Advice on potential CD from editorial –titled “When is Celiac Disease Celiac Disease?”

  • Review the biopsies: were there adequate biopsy specimens? ≥4 from descending duodenum and ≥1 from duodenal bulb
  • Have a second specialist pathologist review specimens
  • If a patient with potential CD is symptomatic, institute a gluten-free diet and then follow for clinical and serologic response
  • If asymptomatic, “a wait and see approach is appropriate with interval biopsies every 2 years, if the elevated antibodies persist”

The editorial also note that none of the patients in this cohort would have been mislabeled with a diagnosis of CD using the non-biopsy approach as none of them had tTG antibodies >10 times the upper level of normal.

My take: This useful study should help with counseling parents about the likelihood of developing celiac disease in those with the “potential” label.  Younger children (<3 yrs), compared to older children, are less likely to convert from potential celiac disease to actual celiac disease..

Related blog posts:

Crater Lake, OR

Dust Mites and Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Given seasonal fluctuation in the activity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), aeroallergens have been considered a trigger in some patients.

Briefly noted: A recent study (A Ravi et al. Gastroenterol 2019; 157: 255-6, editorial 17) showed that dust mite antigen was present in esophageal biopsy specimens at a greater level in adult patients with EoE compared to controls.  With active EoE, patients had dust mite staining in 1.6% of the field which was significantly greater than patients with inactive EoE (0.7). The control group had a complete absence of epithelial dust mite staining.

The editorial (Seena Aceves) notes that these investigators have also shown gluten accumulation in the EoE esophagus.  Whether dust mite antigens or other specific postulated aeroallergens plays a causative role is unclear.  This study shows the presence of these antigens in the esophagus but does not show whether this is an epiphenomenon due to increased permeability or whether these antigens activate the local immune system.

A second study (T Patton et al. JPGN 2019; 69: e43-e48) describes the outcome of coexisting celiac disease and eosinophilic esophagitis in 22 children (from a cohort of 350 children with celiac disease. 17 had repeat biopsies.  Four of 17 (23.5%) had resolution of EoE with a gluten-free diet.  Related blog post: Is there a Link Between Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Celiac Disease?

Sagrada Familia, Barcelona

Should Pediatric Patients with Celiac Disease Be Screened for Low Bone Mineral Density?

A recent retrospective study (J Webster et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 1509-14) with 673 children with newly diagnosed (biopsy-proven) celiac disease (CD) (median age 10.6 y) evaluated DXA studies at time of diagnosis.

Key findings:

  • Approximately 7% (n=46) had a low lumbar spine areal bone mineral density (aBMD) z-score (less than -2)
  • Of those with abnormal aBMDs, 18 had repeat studies.  11 of 18 normalized after institution of dietary management. Mean time for repeat DXA was 2.3 years
  • Of note, mean BMI z-score at time of repeat DXA was 0.005 (this includes 90 who had followup studies after a normal baseline DXA).
  • Low body mass index (BMI) with z-score of -0.4 identified a >10% risk of an abnormal aBMD

The authors acknowledge than DXA screening is controversial.  The current study’s strength is its large size.  Limitations include the inability to correlate with clinical factors including adherence to a gluten-free diet.

My take:

  1. Based on this study, it is likely that only 2-3% of pediatric patients with celiac disease will have a persistently abnormal DXA after institution of a gluten free diet for 2 years; it is likely that even more will improve with time if receiving appropriate dietary treatment.
  2. I am not likely to recommend obtaining a baseline DXA study in pediatric patients with newly diagnosed celiac disease; the treatment for low bone mineral density in the setting of celiac disease is the same as for all children with celiac disease.  If one were inclined to look for low BMD, optimal timing would likely be AFTER being adherent on a gluten free diet for at least two years particularly in those who had low BMI at presentation.

Related blog posts:

Columbus Monument, Barcelona

Disclaimer: These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications/diets (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician/nutritionist.  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

 

First Year of Life Antibiotics and Celiac Disease

Briefly noted:

A recent study (SD Sander et al. Gastroenterol 2019; 156: 2217-29) found an association between antibiotics in the first year of life and celiac disease.

The authors “collected medical information on 1.7 million children, including 3346 with a diagnosis of celiac disease” using nationwide register-based cohorts from Norway and Denmark.

Key finding:

  • “Exposure to systematic antibiotics in the first year of life was positively associated with diagnosed celiac disease,” pooled odds ratio 1.26.  Furthermore, there was a dose-dependent relationship with increasing number of exposures increasing the risk of celiac disease.

My take: The increase in prevalence of celiac disease over that past few decades is likely related to changes in our environment.  These changes affect nearly everyone, but some are more susceptible to immune-related disease that may be triggered by these environmental changes.  This study shows that early exposure to antibiotics is likely to be one of the environmental factors that increase the risk of celiac disease.

Related blog posts:

 

Retiro Park, Glass Palace
Madrid

It Can’t Hurt Right? Complimentary and Alternative Medicine and Gluten-Related Disorders

A recent study (G Boyer et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2019; 114: 786-91) examined the promotion of testing and treatment of gluten-related disorders among complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) practitioners. Thanks to Ben Gold for this reference.

Background: CAM expenditures in 2016 by Americans was $30.2 billion in 2016. “Studies have found that it is not uncommon for CAM clinics to make wide-reaching claims as to their abilities to diagnose a plethora of conditions.”  In the present study, the authors reviewed the advertising content of 500 CAM clinic websites with regard to gluten-related disorders..

Key points:

  • The authors further identified 232 claims from 114 clinic websites; 138 (59.5%) were judged as unproven or false.
  • “Some clinics advertised treatments that pose potential harm;” this includes the sale of digestive enzymes promoted to digest gluten and which purport to allow the person with celiac or nonceliac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) to ingest gluten safely.  “This is a baseless claim that could lead to serious harm.”
  • “Other clinics falsely claimed that everyone should be on a gluten-free diet regardless of a diagnosis of celiac disease or NCGS.”

My take: Given the popularity of CAM along with the frequency of misleading claims, this suggests the need for increased regulation.  These websites are likely to increase confusion about the diagnosis and management of gluten-related disorders (which can  be confusing without any help!)

Related blog posts: