The Importance of Neonatal Screening for Galactosemia.

Galactosemia is an inborn metabolic disorder caused by a deficient activity in one of the enzymes involved in the metabolism of galactose. The first description of galactosemia in newborns dates from 1908, ever since complex research has been performed on cell and animal models to gain more insights into the molecular and clinical bases of this challenging disease. In galactosemia, the newborn appears to be born in proper health, having a window of opportunity before developing major morbidities that may even be fatal following ingestion of milk that contains galactose. Galactosemia cannot be cured, but its negative consequences on health can be avoided by establishing precocious diagnosis and treatment. All the foods that contain galactose should be eliminated from the diet when there is a suspicion of galactosemia. The neonatal screening for galactosemia can urge early diagnosis and intervention, preventing complications. All galactosemia types may be detected during the screening of newborns for this disorder. The major target is, however, galactose-1-phosphate uridyltransferase (GALT) deficiency galactosemia, which is diagnosed by applying a combination of total galactose and GALT enzyme analysis as well as, in certain programs, mutation screening. Most critically, infants who exhibit symptoms suggestive of galactosemia should undergo in-depth testing for this condition even when the newborn screening shows normal results. The decision to enroll global screening for galactosemia among the specific population still faces many challenges. In this context, the present narrative review provides an updated overview of the incidence, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, therapy, and prognosis of galactosemia, questioning under the dome of these aspects related to the disease the value of its neonatal monitoring.

Comparative Acceptability and Perceived Clinical Utility of Monitoring Tools: A Nationwide Survey of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Objective control of intestinal inflammation during inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is becoming the main driver for medical treatment. However, the monitoring tools-related burden remains poorly investigated. We aimed to evaluate their comparative acceptability and utility according to patients with IBD. METHODS: After a preliminary phase, the final questionnaire encompassing self-administered and physician questionnaires was prospectively and consecutively submitted to 916 patients with IBD from 20 public and private centers. Acceptability and utility visual analog scales (VAS) were expressed as median with interquartile range. RESULTS: Regarding the group of patients with Crohn's disease (n = 618), venipuncture (VAS = 9.3 [8.8-9.7]) and ultrasonography (VAS = 9.3 [8.7-9.7]) were the most acceptable tools (P < 0.0001, for each comparison), whereas rectosigmoidoscopy was the least acceptable tool (VAS = 4.4 [1.2-7.3]) (P < 0.0001, for each comparison). Wireless capsule endoscopy (VAS = 8.5 [5.2-9.3]), magnetic resonance enterocolonography (VAS = 8.0 [5.0-9.2]), and stools collection (VAS = 7.7 [4.6-9.3]) were more acceptable than colonoscopy (VAS = 6.7 [4.3-8.9]) (P < 0.0001, for each comparison). The acceptability was assessed in 298 patients with ulcerative colitis for venipuncture (VAS = 9.4 [8.8-9.7]), stools collection (VAS = 8.1 [5.7-9.4]), colonoscopy (VAS = 7.5 [4.7-9.2]), and rectosigmoidoscopy (VAS = 6.7 [2.8-9.1]); (P < 0.001 for each comparison). All monitoring tools were considered as highly useful by patients with IBD. Decreased acceptability was related to embarrassment for the collection/transport of stools (60.7%), bowel cleansing (76.3%) for colonoscopy, abdominal discomfort (51.3%) and rectal enema (36.6%) for rectosigmoidoscopy, bowel distension (48.3%) for magnetic resonance enterocolonography, and potential capsule retention (21.4%) for wireless capsule endoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Among the IBD monitoring tools, endoscopy demonstrated the lowest acceptability supporting the development of alternative modalities. Patients' information and examination conditions should be improved to ensure proper monitoring adherence.

Massive hepatic necrosis with gastric, splenic, and pancreatic infarctions after ethanol ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Hepatic necrosis after ethanol ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), although rare, is well known and described, particularly in patients with chronic liver disease. The present report describes a rare case of massive hepatic necrosis with partial gastric, splenic, and pancreatic infarctions after local treatment of liver HCC with ethanol ablation and discusses the reasons for this complication. With the increasing use of percutaneous techniques to treat liver tumors, it is imperative for the interventional radiologist to be aware of the potential vascular complications of these techniques. An appreciation of vascular anatomy via multidetector computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance (MR) angiography is important when planning image-guided interventions.