Background Although recent studies have shown an association between obesity and adverse coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patient outcomes, there is a paucity in large studies focusing on hospitalized patients. We aimed to analyze outcomes associated with obesity in a large cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods We performed a retrospective study at a tertiary care health system of adult patients with COVID-19 who were admitted between March 1 and April 30, 2020. Patients were stratified by body mass index (BMI) into obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2) and non-obese (BMI < 30 kg/m 2) cohorts. Primary outcomes were mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation, and 30-day readmission. Results A total of 1983 patients were included of whom 1031 (51.9%) had obesity and 952 (48.9%) did not have obesity. Patients with obesity were younger (P < 0.001), more likely to be female (P < 0.001) and African American (P < 0.001) compared to patients without obesity. Multivariable logistic models adjusting for differences in age, sex, race, medical comorbidities, and treatment modalities revealed no difference in 60-day mortality and 30-day readmission between obese and non-obese groups. In these models, patients with obesity had increased odds of ICU admission (adjusted OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.07-1.76; P = 0.012) and intubation (adjusted OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.04-1.80; P = 0.026). Conclusions Obesity in patients with COVID-19 is independently associated with increased risk for ICU admission and intubation. Recognizing that obesity impacts morbidity in this manner is crucial for appropriate management of COVID-19 patients.

OBJECT Temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) in the absence of MRI abnormalities and memory deficits is often presumed to have an extramesial or even extratemporal source. In this paper the authors report the results of a comprehensive stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) analysis in patients with TLE with normal MRI images and memory scores. METHODS Eighteen patients with medically refractory epilepsy who also had unremarkable MR images and normal verbal and visual memory scores on neuropsychological testing were included in the study. All patients had seizure semiology and video electroencephalography (EEG) findings suggestive of TLE. A standardized SEEG investigation was performed for each patient with electrodes implanted into the mesial and lateral temporal lobe, temporal tip, posterior temporal neocortex, orbitomesiobasal frontal lobe, posterior cingulate gyrus, and insula. This information was used to plan subsequent surgical management. RESULTS Interictal SEEG abnormalities were observed in the mesial temporal structures in 17 patients (94%) and in the temporal tip in 6 (33%). Seizure onset was exclusively from mesial structures in 13 (72%), exclusively from lateral temporal cortex and/or temporal tip structures in 2 (11%), and independently from mesial and neocortical foci in 3 (17%). No seizure activity was observed arising from any extratemporal location. All patients underwent surgical intervention targeting the temporal lobe and tailored to the SEEG findings, and all experienced significant improvement in seizure frequency with a postoperative follow-up observation period of at least 1 year. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates 3 important findings: 1) normal memory does not preclude mesial temporal seizure onset; 2) onset of seizures exclusively from mesial temporal structures without early neocortical involvement is common, even in the absence of memory deficits; and 3) extratemporal seizure onset is rare when video EEG and semiology are consistent with focal TLE.

No abstract

The relative increase in Aβ42 peptides from familial Alzheimer disease (FAD) linked APP and PSEN mutations can be related to changes in both ε-cleavage site utilization and subsequent step-wise cleavage. Cleavage at the ε-site releases the amyloid precursor protein (APP) intracellular domain (AICD), and perturbations in the position of ε-cleavage are closely associated with changes in the profile of amyloid β-protein (Aβ) species that are produced and secreted. The mechanisms by which γ-secretase modulators (GSMs) or FAD mutations affect the various γ-secretase cleavages to alter the generation of Aβ peptides have not been fully elucidated. Recent studies suggested that GSMs do not modulate ε-cleavage of APP, but the data were derived principally from recombinant truncated epitope tagged APP substrate. Here, using full length APP from transfected cells, we investigated whether GSMs modify the ε-cleavage of APP under more native conditions. Our results confirmed the previous findings that ε-cleavage is insensitive to GSMs. In addition, fenofibrate, an inverse GSM (iGSM), did not alter the position or kinetics of ε-cleavage position in vitro. APH1A and APH1B, a subunit of the γ-secretase complex, also modulated Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio without any alterations in ε-cleavage, a result in contrast to what has been observed with PS1 and APP FAD mutations. Consequently, GSMs and APH1 appear to modulate γ-secretase activity and Aβ42 generation by altering processivity but not ε-cleavage site utilization.

INTRODUCTION: To inform the patient-centered discussion regarding comparative outcomes with irritable bowel syndrome/chronic idiopathic constipation pharmacotherapy, we evaluated reasons and timing of discontinuation of FDA-approved pharmacotherapy for irritable bowel syndrome and chronic idiopathic constipation in a large observational real-world cohort. METHODS: We identified patients initiating lubiprostone or linaclotide within the University of Michigan Electronic Medical Record (2012–2016). Medication start and stop dates were determined in manual chart review including detailed review of all documentation including office notes and telephone encounters. A Cox model was constructed to predict the hazard of discontinuation. RESULTS: On multivariate analysis of 1,612 patients, linaclotide users had a lower risk of discontinuing therapy than lubiprostone users for any reason (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.5–0.8). At 3 and 12 months, the overall discontinuation rates were 23% and 43% for lubiprostone compared with 14% and 24% for linaclotide. Over the first year of therapy, more than half of discontinuations due to intolerance occurred in the first 3 months for both drugs. Linaclotide users were more likely to discontinue due to intolerance (HR = 1.6 [95% CI, 1.2–2.3]) but less likely to discontinue due to insufficient efficacy of therapy (HR = 0.5 [95% CI, 0.4–0.8]). IBS diagnosis increased the hazard of discontinuation of lubiprostone relative to linactolide (HR = 1.4, 95% CI, 1.1–1.6). Loss of prescription drug coverage remained a common reason for discontinuation over the first year of therapy. DISCUSSION: Individuals appear more likely to discontinue lubiprostone than linaclotide overall, but more likely to discontinue linaclotide compared with lubiprostone due to intolerance (mostly diarrhea). Most discontinuations due to intolerance occur in the first 3 months. These results may be useful in individualized treatment selection and enhancing patient knowledge regarding long-term outcomes.

Background There is a high prevalence of liver injury (LI) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, few large-scale studies assessing risk factors and clinical outcomes in these patients have been done. Aims To evaluate the risk factors and clinical outcomes associated with LI in a large inpatient cohort of COVID-19 patients. Methods Adult patients with COVID-19 between March 1 and April 30, 2020, were included. LI was defined as peak levels of alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase that were 3 times the ULN or peak levels in alkaline phosphatase/total bilirubin that were 2 times the ULN. Mild elevation in liver enzymes (MEL) was defined as abnormal peak liver enzyme levels lower than the threshold for LI. Patients with MEL and LI were compared to a control group comprising patients with normal liver enzymes throughout hospitalization. Results Of 1935 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, 1031 (53.2%) had MEL and 396 (20.5%) had LI. Compared to control patients, MEL and LI groups contained proportionately more men. Patients in the MEL cohort were older compared to control, and African-Americans were more highly represented in the LI group. Patients with LI had an increased risk of mortality (relative risk [RR] 4.26), intensive care unit admission (RR, 5.52), intubation (RR, 11.01), 30-day readmission (RR, 1.81), length of hospitalization, and intensive care unit stay (10.49 and 10.06 days, respectively) compared to control. Conclusion Our study showed that patients with COVID-19 who presented with LI had a significantly increased risk of mortality and poor clinical outcomes.

Background and study aims Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is being increasingly utilized for non-pedunculated polyps ≥ 20 mm due to adverse events associated with use of cautery. Larger studies evaluating adenoma recurrence rate (ARR) and risk factors for recurrence following cold snare EMR of large polyps are lacking. The aim of this study was to define ARR for polyps ≥ 20 mm removed by cold snare EMR and to identify risk factors for recurrence. Patients and methods A retrospective chart review of colon cold snare EMR procedures performed between January 2015 and July 2019 at a tertiary care medical center was performed. During this period, 310 non-pedunculated polyps ≥ 20 mm were excised using cold snare EMR with follow-up surveillance colonoscopy. Patient demographic data as well as polyp characteristics at the time of index and surveillance colonoscopy were collected and analyzed. Results A total of 108 of 310 polyps (34.8 %) demonstrated adenoma recurrence at follow-up colonoscopy. Patients with a higher ARR were older (P = 0.008), had endoscopic clips placed at index procedure (P = 0.017), and were more likely to be Asian and African American (P = 0.02). ARR was higher in larger polyps (P < 0.001), tubulovillous adenomas (P < 0.001), and polyps with high-grade dysplasia (P = 0.003). Conclusions Although cold snare EMR remains a feasible alternative to hot snare polypectomy for resection of non-pedunculated polyps ≥ 20 mm, endoscopists must also carefully consider factors associated with increased ARR when utilizing this technique.

INTRODUCTION: Telehealth is an emerging technology that enables remote video visits between providers and their patients. The role of a telehealth visit prior to high-risk endoscopy has not been evaluated. The purpose of this study was to pilot a patient survey to assess experiences and preferences for different visit types including telehealth (TH), face-to-face (F2F), and direct access (DA) (i.e., without meeting with a GI physician) prior to undergoing advanced endoscopic procedures. METHODS: We developed a survey instrument to assess patient knowledge and preference regarding visit types prior to advanced endoscopic procedures. The survey was refined through input from an expert survey working group. The questionnaire was then administered immediately prior to informed consent to patients undergoing advanced endoscopy procedures at a tertiary referral academic VA medical center. Exclusion criteria included inability to consent and prior exposure to advanced endoscopic procedures. Data were collected on demographics, computer and health literacy, knowledge of procedural risks, benefits, and alternatives, comfort with the proceduralist, visit satisfaction, and overall preference of pre-procedural visit modality. Differences between groups were analyzed using a Chi-Square test. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients completed the pilot questionnaire (Table 1). 20 patients were in the DA group, 11 in the F2F group, and 9 in the TH group. Most respondents in the TH and F2F visit groups (78% and 82%, respectively) were satisfied with their visit types and would choose the same visit modality in the future (Table 2, Figure 1). In contrast, significantly fewer (30%, P = 0.003) in the DA group were satisfied with their visit type. Patients with transportation difficulties were more likely to choose a TH visit (P = 0.018). CONCLUSION: In this pilot survey, a telehealth visit prior to advanced endoscopic procedures appears to be an acceptable alternative to a F2F visit in terms of patient satisfaction. Most respondents preferred a pre-procedural clinic visit with GI (via either telehealth or F2F) over DA, underscoring the importance of a measured discussion about risks and alternatives for high-risk endoscopic procedures. In the future, telehealth could be considered the visit modality of choice for patients referred for advanced endoscopic procedures who live a significant distance from the procedure site. These results will be confirmed with a larger sample in a future study.