No abstract
The occurrence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) in the setting of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) exposure is uncommon, with incidence reported at around 0.2%. Delayed-onset (autoimmune) HIT in the setting of LMWH use is rarer, with only two other case reports in the literature. An 83-year old man was admitted to hospital for an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, receiving low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH, tinzaparin) while in hospital for prophylaxis against deep venous thrombosis (DVT). One day after discharge, he presented to the emergency department with acute chest pain and dyspnea. Computed tomography revealed bilateral pulmonary embolism, multiple abdominal aortic thromboses, and unilateral adrenal hemorrhage, and he was given a bolus of intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH) in the emergency department. His platelet count (prior to UFH bolus) was found to be markedly reduced (39 × 109/L) from normal values two days prior. We suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) to have caused the thrombocytopenia and thromboses (arterial and venous), and thus anticoagulation therapy was changed from heparin to argatroban. His HIT assay was strongly positive, including features of autoimmune reactivity (serum-induced platelet activation in the absence of heparin). HIT developing after exposure to tinzaparin is relatively rare, and use of a scoring system helped to facilitate an early diagnosis. Additionally, this case demonstrates heparin-independent platelet activation, a marker for autoimmune HIT (aHIT). The patient's serum tested strongly positive for IgG-specific anti-PF4/heparin EIA and serotonin release assay. The presence of these antibodies would also explain the further decline in his platelet count to 10 x 109/L after he received a bolus dose of heparin at the beginning of his second hospitalization. This case highlights the third reported case of delayed-onset HIT in the setting of LMWH, and the rapid response to high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin.
Background Simethicone is an anti-foaming agent which can be used to decrease the surface tension of air bubbles and improve visualization of colonic mucosa during colonoscopy. Recent studies have found that residual simethicone persists in endoscopes despite reprocessing and disinfection and promotes persistent moisture in endoscope channels. Simethicone residues can theoretically contribute to biofilm formation by providing nutritional milieu for microbial growth, which could increase the risk of transmission of infections among patients. Endoscopists’ perceptions on simethicone use and potential benefits are unknown, and this study aims to start filling this gap. Aims To assess experience and perceptions of simethicone use during colonoscopy in North America. Methods A REDCap® survey was distributed via email to members of various national professional associations and personal contacts of the study authors. Once the survey is complete, logistic regression analysis will be performed to assess univariate and multivariate associations of simethicone use. Preliminary data are reported in this abstract. Results 47 practicing endoscopists have responded so far, of which 31 (64%) are surgeons and 16 are gastroenterologists (34%). The participants had been in practice for a median of eight years (range 1 – 34 years) and performed a median of ten colonoscopies per week. All 47 endoscopists practiced in Canada, with representation from seven provinces. Two endoscopists (4%) ask patients to use simethicone orally as part of their bowel preparation. During outpatient colonoscopy, 22 endoscopists (47%) never use simethicone, 19 endoscopists (40%) use simethicone less than 50% of the time, and six endoscopists (13%) use simethicone more than 50% of the time. Endoscopists were divided as to whether certain bowel preparations influenced their use of simethicone (agree or strongly agree 9, 19%; neutral 29, 62%; disagree or strongly disagree 9, 19%), that simethicone use could contribute to the transmission of pathogens through endoscopes (agree or strongly agree 6, 13%; neutral 34, 72%; disagree or strongly disagree 7, 15%), or that simethicone use increases their adenoma detection rate (agree or strongly agree 18, 38%; neutral 21, 45%; disagree or strongly disagree 8, 17%). Conclusions Of the current respondents of this survey, just over half (53%) of endoscopists report using simethicone during outpatient colonoscopies. Most reported simethicone use was via the water pump or instrument channel; oral simethicone use maybe minimal. Current respondents were divided in their perception that type of bowel preparation influences their use of simethicone or that simethicone use could contribute to the transmission of pathogens. Many endoscopists believed simethicone use could increase their adenoma detection rate. Funding Agencies None
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.