Antimicrobial prophylaxis in patients with colorectal lesions undergoing endoscopic resection

AIM: To investigate the effect of prophylaxis withantibiotics on clinical adverse events in patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD) or endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR) for colorectal lesions.METHODS: From June 2011 to December 2013, a total of 428 patients were enrolled into the study, of which 214 patients admitted to hospital underwent EMR or ESD procedures. These patients were randomized to an antibiotic group, in which patients were given cefuroxime 1.5 g iv half an hour before and 6 h after surgery respectively, and a control group, in which patients were not given any antibiotic. A further 214 outpatients with small polyps treated by polypectomy were compared with controls that were matched by age and gender, and operations were performed as outpatient surgery. Recorded patient parameters were demographics, characteristics of lesions and treatment modality, and the size of the wound area. The primary outcome measures were clinical adverse events, including abdominal pain, diarrhea, hemotachezia, and fever. Secondary outcome measures were white blood cell count, C-reactive protein and blood culture. Additionlly, the relationship between the size of the wound area and clinical adverse events was analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 409 patients were enrolled in this study, with 107 patients in the control group, 107 patients in the antibiotic group, and another 195 cases in the follow-up outpatient group. The patients' demographic characteristics, including age, gender, characteristics of lesions, treatment modality, and the size of the wound area were similar between the 2 groups. The rates of adverse events in the antibiotic group were significantly lower than in the control group: abdominal pain(2.8% vs 14.9%, P < 0.01), diarrhea(2.0% vs 9.3%, P < 0.05), and fever(0.9% vs 8.4%, P < 0.05) respectively. The levels of inflammatory markers also decreased significantly in the antibiotic group compared with the control group: leukocytosis(2.0% vs 11.2%, P < 0.01), and C-reactiveprotein(2.0% vs 10.7%, P < 0.05). Additionally, clinica adverse events were related to the size of the surgica wound area. When the surgical wound area was larger than 10 mm × 10 mm, there were more clinica adverse events.CONCLUSION: Clinical adverse events are not uncommon after EMR or ESD procedures. Prophylactic antibiotics can reduce the incidence of clinical adverse events. This should be further explored.

Differences in viral kinetics between genotypes 1 and 3 of hepatitis C virus and between cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients during antiviral therapy

AIM： TO evaluate the impact of hepatitis C virus （HCV） infection with genotype 1 or 3 and the presence or absence of liver cirrhosis （LC） in the early viral kinetics response to treatment. METHODS： Naive patients （n = 46） treated with interferon-α （IFN-α） and ribavirin and followed up with frequent early HCV-RNA determinations were analysed. Patients were infected with genotype 1 （n = 28, 7 with LC） or 3 （n = 18, 5 with LC）. RESULTS： The first phase decline was larger in genotype 3 patients than in genotype 1 patients （1.72 vs 0.95 log IU/mL, P 〈 0.001）. The second phase slope decline was also larger in genotype 3 patients than in genotype 1 patients （0.87 vs 0.15 log/wk, P 〈 0.001）. Differences were found in both cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients. Genotype 1 cirrhotic patients had a slower 2^nd phase slope than non-cirrhotic patients （0.06 vs 0.18 log/wk, P 〈 0,02）. None of genotype 1 cirrhotic patients had a 1^st phase decline larger than 1 log （non-cirrhotic patients： 55%, P 〈 0.02）. A similar trend toward a slower 2nd phase slope was observed in genotype 3 cirrhotic patients but the 1^st phase slope decline was not different. Sustained viral response was higher in genotype 3 patients than in genotype 1 patients ,（72% vs 14%, P 〈 0.001） and in genotype 1 non-cirrhotic patients than in genotype 1 cirrhotic patients （19% vs 0%）. A second phase decline slower than 0.3 log per week was predictive of non-response in all groups. CONCLUSION： Genotype 3 has faster early viral decline than genotype 1. Cirrhosis correlates with a slower 2nd phase decline and possibly with a lower 1^st phase slope decline in genotype 1 patients.

Immune thrombocytopenic purpura induced by intestinal tuberculosis in a liver transplant recipient

A variety of clinical manifestations are associated directly or indirectly with tuberculosis. Among them, haematological abnormalities can be found in both the pulmonary and extrapulmonary forms of the disease. We report a case of immune thrombocytopenic purpura(ITP) associated with intestinal tuberculosis in a liver transplant recipient. The initial management of thrombocytopenia, with steroids and intravenous immunoglobulin, was not successful, and the lack oftuberculosis symptoms hampered a proper diagnostic evaluation. After the diagnosis of intestinal tuberculosis and the initiation of specific treatment, a progressive increase in the platelet count was observed. The mechanism of ITP associated with tuberculosis has not yet been well elucidated, but this condition should be considered in cases of ITP that are unresponsive to steroids and intravenous immunoglobulin, especially in immunocompromised patients and those from endemic areas.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The Final Moments of Life

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a wide world prevalent hepatic disease, being the third greater cancer related death cause and most of the patients are not eligible for liver transplant. Palliative care is an option for, in average, half of hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosed patients and only recently the molecular targeted drug, Sorafenib, has been introduced among the therapeutic options for these patients. The physical pain comes frequently associated with progression disease (metastasis). Patients may be very fragile, with immobility, loss of interest in food and beverage intake, as well as weakness and drowsiness. Therefore, it is important that health professionals start planning care with patients and their relatives, before the end-stage disease. Informing the patient about therapeutic options guarantee a doctor patient relationship improvement and more belief on the health team.