Small and large bowel anatomy is associated with enteral autonomy in infants with short bowel syndrome: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Achievement of enteral autonomy (EA) is the ultimate treatment goal in pediatric intestinal failure (IF). We aimed to assess predictors of EA in pediatric short bowel syndrome (SBS) and explore the impact of residual small bowel (SB) and large bowel (LB) length on EA. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed on infants aged <12 months (n = 367, six centers) with SBS referred between 2010 and 2015. The cohort was stratified based on the achievement of EA. Statistical testing was completed using t-test, chi-square, Cox proportional hazards regression model, and Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: EA was achieved in 229 patients. In the multivariable analysis, the percentage of residual LB (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.02; 95% CI = 1.01-1.02) and SB (HR = 1.01; 95% CI = 1.01-1.02) length, presence of the ileocecal valve (HR = 2.02; 95% CI=1.41-2.88), and not coming from a high-volume transplantation center (HR = 2.42; 95% CI = 1.68-3.49) were positively associated with EA, whereas a negative association was seen with the presence of stoma at the time when shortest remnant was documented (HR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.52-1.00). EA achievement was significantly different between the anatomical subgroups (log-rank test P < 0.001) with an EA rate of 80.4% in infants with ≥50% SB and LB (median time 209 days); 62.5% with ≥50% SB and <50% LB (397 days); 58.3% with <50% SB and ≥50% LB (1192 days), and 25.9% with <50% SB and LB. Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) was not associated with a better achievement of EA (NEC vs other etiologies: log-rank test P = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 62% of infants with IF secondary to SBS achieved EA over a mean time of follow-up of 2.3 years. A colon length of >50% can compensate for the loss of small bowel (<50%) and account for similar EA rates as those in children with residual SB > 50%.

Cost-utility analysis of 4% tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, taurolidine, and heparin lock to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections in children with intestinal failure.

BACKGROUND: Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) are a serious complication in children with intestinal failure. This study assessed the incremental costs of 4% tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) compared with taurolidine lock and heparin lock per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained in children with intestinal failure from the healthcare payer and societal perspective. METHODS: A Markov cohort model of a 1-year-old child with intestinal failure was simulated until the age of 17 years (time horizon), with a cycle length of 1 month. The health outcome measure was QALYs, with results expressed in terms of incremental costs and QALYs. Model parameters were obtained from published literature and institutional data. Deterministic, probabilistic, and scenario sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: 4% Tetrasodium EDTA was dominant (more effective and less expensive) compared with taurolidine and heparin, yielding an additional 0.17 QALYs with savings of CAD$88,277 compared with heparin, and an additional 0.06 QALYs with savings of CAD$52,120 compared with taurolidine lock from the healthcare payer perspective. From the societal perspective, 4% tetrasodium EDTA resulted in savings of CAD$90,696 compared with heparin and savings of CAD$36,973 compared with taurolidine lock. CONCLUSIONS: This model-based analysis indicates that 4% tetrasodium EDTA can be considered the optimal strategy compared with taurolidine and heparin in terms of cost-effectiveness. The decision uncertainty can be reduced by conducting further research on the model input parameters. An expected value of perfect information analysis can identify what model input parameters would be most valuable to focus on.

Cost-utility analysis of teduglutide compared to standard care in weaning parenteral nutrition support in children with short bowel syndrome.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A growing proportion of children with short bowel syndrome (SBS) remain dependent on long-term parenteral nutrition (PN). Teduglutide offers the potential for more children to decrease PN support and achieve enteral autonomy (EA), but at a significant expense. This study aims to assess the incremental costs of teduglutide plus standard of care compared to standard of care alone in weaning PN support per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in children with SBS. METHODS: This is a cost-utility analysis comparing teduglutide with standard of care alone in children with SBS. A microsimulation model of children with SBS on PN aged 1-17 years was constructed over a time horizon of six years, with a cycle length of one month. The study adopted the healthcare system and societal payer perspectives in Ontario, Canada. The health outcome measure was QALYs, with results expressed in terms of incremental costs and QALYs. Scenario analyses were performed to examine the effects of different time horizons, timing of teduglutide initiation, and modeling cost of teduglutide based on pediatric weight-dosing. RESULTS: Incremental healthcare system costs for teduglutide compared to standard of care were CAD$441,314 (95% CI, 414,006 to 441,314) and incremental QALYs were 1.80 (95% CI, 1.70 to 1.89) resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CAD$285,334 (95% CI, 178,209 to 392,459) per QALY gained. Incremental societal costs were CAD$418,504 (95% CI, 409,487 to 427,522) and incremental societal QALYs were 1.91 (95% CI, 1.85 to 1.98) resulting in an ICER of CAD$261,880 (95% CI, 136,887 to 386,874) per QALY gained. Scenario analysis showed that teduglutide was cost-effective when it was started two years after intestinal resection (ICER CAD$48,741, 95% CI, 17,317 to 80,165) and when its monthly cost was adjusted using weight-based dosing, avoiding wastage of the remaining 5 mg dose vial (Teduglutide dominated over SOC as the less costly and most effective strategy). CONCLUSIONS: Although teduglutide was not cost-effective in weaning PN support in children with SBS, starting teduglutide once natural intestinal adaptation is reduced and adjusting its monthly cost to reflect cost by volume as dictated by weight-based dosing rendered the intervention cost-effective relative to standard of care. These results indicate the potential for clinicians to re-assess optimal time for initiation of teduglutide after intestinal resection, drug manufacturers to consider the use of multi-dose or paediatric-dose vials, and the opportunity for decision-makers to re-evaluate teduglutide funding.

International Latin American Survey on Pediatric Intestinal Failure Team.

There is little data on the experience of managing pediatric Intestinal Failure (IF) in Latin America. This study aimed to identify and describe the current organization and practices of the IF teams in Latin America and the Caribbean. An online survey was sent to inquire about the existence of IF teams that managed children on home parenteral nutrition (HPN). Our questionnaire was based on a previously published European study with a similar goal. Twenty-four centers with pediatric IF teams in eight countries completed the survey, representing a total number of 316 children on HPN. The median number of children on parenteral nutrition (PN) at home per team was 5.5 (range 1-50). Teams consisted of the following members: pediatric gastroenterologist and a pediatric surgeon in all teams, dietician (95.8%), nurse (91.7%), social worker (79.2%), pharmacist (70.8%), oral therapist (62.5%), psychologist (58.3%), and physiotherapist (45.8%). The majority of the centers followed international standards of care on vascular access, parenteral and enteral nutrition, and IF medical and surgical management, but a significant percentage reported inability to monitor micronutrients, like vitamins A (37.5%), E (41.7%), B1 (66.7%), B2 (62.5%), B6 (62.5%), active B12 (58.3%); and trace elements-including zinc (29.2%), aluminum (75%), copper (37.5%), chromium (58.3%), selenium (58.3%), and manganese (58.3%). Conclusion: There is wide variation in how IF teams are structured in Latin America-while many countries have well-established Intestinal rehabilitation programs, a few do not follow international standards. Many countries did not report having an IF team managing pediatric patients on HPN.

Trends in Pediatric Intestinal Failure: A Multicenter, Multinational Study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the natural history and outcomes of children with intestinal failure in a large, multicenter, geographically diverse contemporary cohort (2010-2015) from 6 pediatric intestinal failure programs. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a multicenter intestinal failure cohort (n = 443). Competing-risk analysis was used to obtain cumulative incidence rates for the primary outcome (enteral autonomy, transplantation, or death). The χ2 test and Cox proportional hazard regression were used for bivariate and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 443 patients (61.2% male). Primary etiologies included short bowel syndrome (SBS), 84.9%; dysmotility disorder, 7.2%; and mucosal enteropathy, 7.9%. Cumulative incidences for enteral autonomy, transplantation, and death at 6 years of follow-up were 53.0%, 16.7%, and 10.5%, respectively. Enteral autonomy was associated with SBS, ≥50% of small bowel length, presence of an ileocecal valve (ICV), absence of portal hypertension, and follow-up in a non-high-volume transplantation center. The composite outcome of transplantation/death was associated with persistent advanced cholestasis and hypoalbuminemia; age <1 year at diagnosis, ICV, and intact colon were protective. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of death and transplantation in children with intestinal failure have decreased; however, the number of children achieving enteral autonomy has not changed significantly, and a larger proportion of patients remain parenteral nutrition dependent. New strategies to achieve enteral autonomy are needed to improve patient outcomes.

Band ligation versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Prevention is, therefore, important. Randomised clinical trials have shown that non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal band ligation decrease the incidence of variceal bleeding in adults. In children and adolescents, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as primary prophylaxis alternatives for oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, it is unknown whether these interventions are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, and two other databases (April 2020). We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications, and we also handsearched abstract books of the two main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences from January 2008 to December 2019. We also searched clinicaltrials.gov, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for ongoing clinical trials. We imposed no language or document type restrictions on our search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We aimed to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status, to assess the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. If the search for randomised clinical trials retrieved quasi-randomised and other observational studies, then we read them through to extract information on harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodology to perform this systematic review. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We used the intention-to-treat principle. We analysed data using Review Manager 5. MAIN RESULTS: One conference abstract, describing a feasibility multi-centre randomised clinical trial, fulfilled our review inclusion criteria. We judged the trial at overall high risk of bias. This trial was conducted in three hospital centres in the United Kingdom. The aim of the trial was to determine the feasibility and safety of further larger randomised clinical trials of prophylactic band ligation versus no active treatment in children with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. Twelve children received prophylactic band ligation and 10 children received no active treatment. There was no information on the age of the children included, or about the diagnosis of any child included. All children were followed up for at least six months. Mortality was 8% (1/12) in the band ligation group versus 0% (0/10) in the no active intervention group (risk ratio (RR) 2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 56.25; very low certainty of evidence). The abstract did not report when the death occurred, but we assume it happened between the six-month follow-up and one year. No child (0%) in the band ligation group developed adverse events (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.25; very low certainty of evidence) but one child out of 10 (10%) in the no active intervention group developed idiopathic thrombocytopaenic purpura. One child out of 12 (8%) in the band ligation group underwent liver transplantation versus none in the no active intervention group (0%) (RR 2.54, 95% CI 0.11 to 56.25; very low certainty of evidence). The trial reported no other serious adverse events or liver-related morbidity. Quality of life was not reported. Oesophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 8% (1/12) of the children in the band ligation group versus 30% (3/10) of the children in the no active intervention group (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.27; very low certainty of evidence). No adverse events considered non-serious were reported. Two children were lost to follow-up by one-year. Ten children in total completed the trial at two-year follow-up. There was no information on funding.  We found two observational studies on endoscopic variceal ligation when searching for randomised trials. One found no harm, and the other reported E nterobacter cloacae septicaemia in one child and mild, transient, upper oesophageal sphincter stenosis in another. We did not assess these studies for risk of bias. We did not find any ongoing randomised clinical trials of interest to our review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence, obtained from only one feasibility randomised clinical trial at high risk of bias, is very scanty. It is very uncertain about whether prophylactic band ligation versus sham or no (active) intervention may affect mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, or oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. We have no data on quality of life. No adverse events considered non-serious were reported. The results presented in the trial need to be interpreted with caution. In addition, the highly limited data cover only part of our research question; namely, children with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. Data on children with portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Larger randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with sham treatment for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are needed. The trials should include important clinical outcomes such as death, quality of life, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.

Beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Therefore, prevention is important. Band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. However, primary prophylaxis is not the current standard of care in paediatric patients because it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of beta-blockers compared with placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded (April 2020). We screened the reference lists of the retrieved publications and manually searched the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conference (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2008 to December 2019. We searched clinicaltrials.gov, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for ongoing clinical trials. We imposed no language or document type restrictions on our search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised clinical trials, irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status to assess benefits and harms. We included observational studies, retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials, for a narrative report of harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials by standard Cochrane methodologies. We planned to asses risk of bias and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We planned to use intention-to-treat principle. We planned to analyse data with RevMan Analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We found no randomised clinical trials that assessed beta-blockers compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. We found four observational studies that reported on harms. As a systematic search for observational studies was not planned, we only listed the reported harms in a table. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of beta-blockers versus placebo on patient-relevant clinical outcomes, such as mortality, quality of life, failure to control variceal bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of the two interventions.

SCYL1 disease and liver transplantation diagnosed by reanalysis of exome sequencing and deletion/duplication analysis of SCYL1.

SCYL1 disease results from biallelic pathogenic variants in SCYL1. We report two new patients with severe hepatic phenotype requiring liver transplantation. Patient charts reviewed. DNA samples and skin fibroblasts were utilized. Literature was reviewed. 13-year-old boy and 9-year-old girl siblings had acute liver insufficiency and underwent living related donor liver transplantation in infancy with no genetic diagnosis. Both had tremor, global developmental delay, and cognitive dysfunction during their follow-up in the medical genetic clinic for diagnostic investigations after their liver transplantation. Exome sequencing identified a likely pathogenic variant (c.399delC; p.Asn133Lysfs*136) in SCYL1. Deletion/duplication analysis of SCYL1 identified deletions of exons 7-8 in Patient 1. Both variants were confirmed in Patient 2 and the diagnosis of SCYL1 disease was confirmed in both patients at the age of 13 and 9 years, respectively. SCYL1 protein was not expressed in both patients' fibroblast using western blot analysis. Sixteen patients with SCYL1 disease reported in the literature. Liver phenotype (n = 16), neurological phenotype (n = 13) and skeletal phenotype (n = 11) were present. Both siblings required liver transplantation in infancy and had variable phenotypes. Exome sequencing may miss the diagnosis and phenotyping of patients can help to diagnose patients.

Band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Prevention is therefore important. In adults, numerous randomised clinical trials have demonstrated benefits of non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation as primary prevention in decreasing the risk of variceal haemorrhage. In children, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, primary prophylaxis is not the current standard of care in children because it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or cause harm when used for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded (27 April 2020). We scrutinised the reference lists of retrieved publications, and performed a manual search from the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2008 to 2019. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, EMA, and WHO for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status for assessment of benefits and harms. If the search for randomised clinical trials retrieved quasi-randomised and observational studies, then we read them through to extract information on harms. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials by standard Cochrane methodologies. We planned to assess risk of bias and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence per outcome. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We planned to analyse data with intention-to-treat. We planned to use Review Manager 5 to analyse the data. MAIN RESULTS: We found no randomised clinical trials assessing band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy on patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, quality of life, failure to control variceal bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of these two interventions.

Sclerotherapy versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Therefore, prevention is important. Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in adults is the established standard of care because of the results of numerous randomised clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic variceal ligation in decreasing the incidence of variceal bleeding. In children, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase Elsevier, and two other registers in February 2019. We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications, and performed a manual search of the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conference (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstracts from January 2008 to December 2018. We searched four registries for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status assessing sclerotherapy versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodology to perform this systematic review. We used the intention-to-treat principle to analyse outcome data, and GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence per outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We found only one randomised clinical trial that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The trial was at high risk of bias. The trial included 108 Brazilian children with median age of 4.3 years (range 11 months to 13 years). Fifty-six children were randomised to prophylactic sclerotherapy (ethanolamine oleate 2%) and 52 children to no intervention (control). Children were followed up for a median of 4.5 years. Eight children (six from the sclerotherapy group versus two from the control group) dropped out before the end of the trial. The follow-up was from 18 months to eight years. Mortality was 16% (9/56 children) in the sclerotherapy group versus 15% (8/52 children) in the control group (risk ration (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 2.50; very low-certainty evidence). Upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 21% (12/56) of the children in the sclerotherapy group versus 46% (24/52) in the control group (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.83; very low-certainty evidence). There were more children with congestive hypertensive gastropathy in the sclerotherapy group than in the control group (14% (8/56) versus 6% (3/52); RR 2.48, 95% CI 0.69 to 8.84; very low-certainty evidence). The incidence of gastric varices was similar between the sclerotherapy group and the control group (11% (6/56) versus 10% (5/52); RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.43; very low-certainty evidence). The incidence of bleeding from gastric varices was higher in the sclerotherapy group than in the control group (4% (3/56) versus 0% (0/52); RR 6.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 123.06; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not assess health-related quality of life. Oesophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 5% (3/56) of the children in the sclerotherapy group versus 40% (21/52) of the children in the control group (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.42; very low-certainty evidence). The most prevalent complications (defined as non-serious) were pain and fever after the procedure, which promptly resolved with analgesics. However, numerical data on the frequency of these adverse events and their occurrences in the two groups were lacking. No funding information was provided. We found no ongoing trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence, obtained from one randomised clinical trial at high risk of bias, is very uncertain on whether sclerotherapy has an influence on mortality and if it may decrease first upper gastrointestinal or oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. The evidence is very uncertain on whether sclerotherapy has an influence on congestive hypertensive gastropathy, incidence on gastric varices, and incidence of bleeding from gastric varices. Health-related quality of life was not measured. There were no serious events caused by sclerotherapy, and analysis of non-serious adverse events could not be performed due to lack of numerical data. The GRADE assessment of each outcome showed a very low-certainty evidence. The results of the trial need to be interpreted with caution. Larger randomised clinical trials, following the SPIRIT and CONSORT statements, assessing the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are needed. The trials should include important clinical outcomes such as death, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.

Sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Prevention is therefore important. Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in adults is the established standard of care because of the results of numerous randomised clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic variceal ligation in decreasing the incidence of variceal bleeding. However, sclerotherapy is the only endoscopic prophylactic option currently available in infants weighing less than 10 kg of bodyweight due to the size of the endoscopic ligator. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy versus any type of beta-blocker for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase Elsevier, LILACS (Bireme), and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science) in February 2019. We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications and performed a manual search from the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from January 2008 to December 2018. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, EMA, and WHO, for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status, assessing sclerotherapy versus any type of beta-blocker for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. We planned to include quasi-randomised and other observational studies retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials for report of harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We planned to collect and summarise data from randomised clinical trials as described in our protocol, using standard Cochrane methodologies. MAIN RESULTS: We found no randomised clinical trials assessing sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers on patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of the two interventions.

Band ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Prevention is therefore important. Following numerous randomised clinical trials demonstrating efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation in decreasing the incidence of variceal haemorrhage, primary prophylaxis of variceal haemorrhage in adults has become the established standard of care. Hence, band ligation and beta-blockers have been proposed to be used as primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with any type of beta-blocker for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register (February 2019), CENTRAL (December 2018), PubMed (December 2018), Embase Ovid (December 2018), LILACS (Bireme; January 2019), and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science; December 2018). We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications and performed a manual search from the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2009 to 2018. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status for assessment of benefits and harms. We planned to also include quasi-randomised and other observational studies retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials for report of harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials using standard Cochrane methodologies. MAIN RESULTS: We found no randomised clinical trials assessing band ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of band ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. There is a need for well-designed, adequately powered randomised clinical trials to assess the benefits and harms of band ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Those randomised clinical trials should include patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.

Per oral endoscopic myotomy in a pediatric patient with achalasia. / Miotomía endoscópica por vía oral (POEM) en un paciente pediátrico para tratamiento de la acalasia esofágica.

INTRODUCTION: Achalasia is the most common primary motor disorder of the esophagus. Its reported incidence is low, even more in pediatric patients. Laparoscopic Heller myotomy is the current stan dard of treatment. During the last years, per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been positioned as a safe and effective therapeutic alternative as the Heller procedure for esophageal achalasia. Ob jective: To describe the POEM technique and report the first pediatric case in our country. CLINICAL CASE: 11-year-old patient, previously healthy, who presented with progressive dysphagia for solids and liquids and weight loss. The study concluded a type II achalasia. The patient underwent a POEM and had a postoperative course without incidents. One year after the intervention, symptomatic, endoscopic and manometric resolution have been documented. CONCLUSIONS: The described case is the first POEM in a pediatric patient in our country. Esophageal achalasia is uncommon in pediatrics and POEM has demonstrated clinical success and safety comparable to laparoscopic Heller myotomy in short and medium term. Long-term follow-up will determine its definitive role in the treatment of pediatric patients with esophageal achalasia.

Miotomía endoscópica por vía oral (POEM) en un paciente pediátrico para tratamiento de la acalasia esofágica / Per oral endoscopic myotomy in a pediatric patient with achalasia

INTRODUCCIÓN: La acalasia es el trastorno motor primario más frecuente del esófago. Su incidencia reportada es baja, aún más en pacientes pediátricos. La miotomía de Heller laparoscópica corresponde al estándar actual de tratamiento. Durante los últimos años la miotomía endoscópica por vía oral (POEM) se ha posicionado como una alternativa terapéutica segura y tan efectiva como el Heller para la acalasia esofágica. OBJETIVO: Describir la técnica de POEM y reportar el primer caso pediátrico en nuestro país. CASO CLÍNICO: Paciente de 11 años, previamente sano, que se presentó con disfagia ilógica progresiva y baja de peso. El estudio concluyó una acalasia tipo II. Fue sometido a POEM y cursó un postoperatorio sin incidentes. A un año de la intervención se ha documentado resolución de la sintomatología, seguimiento endoscópico y manométrico sin complicaciones. CONCLUSIONES: El caso descrito corresponde al primer POEM en un paciente pediátrico en nuestro país. La acalasia esofágica es infrecuente en pediatría y el POEM ha demostrado éxito clínico y seguridad comparables a la miotomía de Heller laparoscópica en el corto y mediano plazo. El seguimiento a largo plazo permitirá determinar su rol definitivo en el tratamiento de pacientes pediátricos con acalasia esofágica.

INTRODUCTION: Achalasia is the most common primary motor disorder of the esophagus. Its reported incidence is low, even more in pediatric patients. Laparoscopic Heller myotomy is the current stan dard of treatment. During the last years, per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been positioned as a safe and effective therapeutic alternative as the Heller procedure for esophageal achalasia. OBJECTIVE: To describe the POEM technique and report the first pediatric case in our country. CLINICAL CASE: 11-year-old patient, previously healthy, who presented with progressive dysphagia for solids and liquids and weight loss. The study concluded a type II achalasia. The patient underwent a POEM and had a postoperative course without incidents. One year after the intervention, symptomatic, endoscopic and manometric resolution have been documented. CONCLUSIONS: The described case is the first POEM in a pediatric patient in our country. Esophageal achalasia is uncommon in pediatrics and POEM has demonstrated clinical success and safety comparable to laparoscopic Heller myotomy in short and medium term. Long-term follow-up will determine its definitive role in the treatment of pediatric patients with esophageal achalasia.

[Maternal anemia in Concepción province, Chile: association with maternal nutritional status and fetal growth]. / Anemia del embarazo en la Provincia de Concepción, Chile: relación con el estado nutricional materno y el crecimiento fetal.

Previous studies in Santiago, Chile have established that anemia in the earliest stages of pregnancy is a public health issue. The situation in other parts of the country is unknown. The purpose of this study is to establish the prevalence of anemia in pregnant women in the province of Concepcion and evaluate its association with maternal nutricional status and fetal growth. The study included 1782 women with singleton pregnancies who began prenatal check-ups in 2004 at the public primary health care centers. Anemia was established using the following criteria: from WHO (Hb < 11 g / dl) and from the USA Center for Disease Control (CDC) (Hb < percentile 5 for each gestational week). Anemia prevalence was compared in relation to independent study variables: maternal age, parity, morbidity and smoking habit, and mother and child anthropometry. A multivariable logistic regression model studied the possible effect of anemia on fetal growth. The prevalence of anemia was 10.9% and 14.5% using the WHO and CDC criteria, respectively. The mother's nutritional status was significantly associated with anemia. However, anemia according to WHO and CDC criteria at the beginning of pregnancy was not significantly associated to fetal growth in the univariate and multivariate analyses. The prevalence of anemia in the province of Concepcion constitutes a public health problem that needs to be addressed and it is slightly higher to that recently observed in the county of Puente Alto, Santiago.