Fluoroquinolone-resistant latent tuberculosis infection: A literature review and case series of 5 patients treated with linezolid monotherapy.

Latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) constitutes an important public health problem because of risk of progression to TB disease. Effective treatment of multi-drug resistant (MDR) LTBI would prevent progression to MDR TB disease, which would improve patient and public health outcomes. The majority of MDR LTBI treatment studies have focused on the use of fluoroquinolone-based antibiotic regimens. Options for and experience in the treatment of fluoroquinolone-resistant MDR LTBI are limited in the published literature and not comprehensively addressed in current guidelines. In this review, we share our experience with the treatment of fluoroquinolone-resistant MDR LTBI with linezolid. We discuss treatment options for MDR TB that provide context for predicting effective MDR LTBI treatment, with a focus on the microbiologic and pharmacokinetic properties of linezolid that support its use. We then summarize the evidence for treatment of MDR LTBI. Finally, we present our experiences treating fluoroquinolone-resistant MDR LTBI with linezolid with an emphasis on dosing considerations to optimize efficacy and minimize potential toxicities.

Fecaloma - A Common Problem, Uncommon Dimensions.

Chronic constipation and fecal impaction are common in older individuals but can also be found in younger patients with cognitive and psychiatric illnesses. The diagnosis of fecal impaction and, the assessment of severity are best performed clinically. Here, we present a case of a 30-year-old autistic individual where limited history was obtainable and further imaging helped to urgently diagnose a 47 x 15.6 x 12 cm stool ball, causing significant mass effect of surrounding intra-abdominal structures. Fecal disimpaction and aggressive bowel regimen prevented the pathological effects of severe fecal retention.

A Case of Interstitial Pneumonia with Features of Autoimmunity.

We present a case of a 61-year-old woman with several months of gradually worsening shortness of breath, requiring multiple hospitalizations with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. She was initially treated for eosinophilic pneumonia presumed to be secondary to medications or rheumatoid lung without much improvement. Her subsequent chest CT showed honeycombing and diffuse ground-glass opacities, and she was found to have elevated rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-CCP antibody titers without extrathoracic features of rheumatoid arthritis. This clinical scenario was suggestive of an interstitial lung disease (ILD) due to occult underlying connective tissue disorder (CTD), along the lines of the recently proposed entity interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features (IPAF). She continued to deteriorate rapidly and passed away after experiencing recurrent exacerbations. As there is limited evidence to explain the clinical course of such patients, there is a need for prospective research to develop tailored regimens to prevent progression or even reverse the disease process.

Exploring implications of Medicaid participation and wait times for colorectal screening on early detection efforts in Connecticut--a secret-shopper survey.

BACKGROUND: Routine colorectal screening, decreases in incidence, and advances in treatment have lowered colorectal cancer mortality rates over the past three decades. Nevertheless, it remains the second most common cause of cancer death amongst men and women combined in U.S. Most cases of colon cancer are diagnosed at a late stage leading to poor survival outcomes for patients. After extensive research of publically available data, it would appear that the state of Connecticut does not have available state-wide data on patient wait times for routine colonoscopy screening. Furthermore, there are no publicly available, or Connecticut-specific, reports on Medicaid participation rates for colorectal screening amongst gastroenterologists (GI) in Connecticut. In 2012, the American Cancer Society report on Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates confirmed barriers to health-care access and disparities in health outcomes and survival rates for colon cancer patients based on race, ethnicity, and low socioeconomic status. Given this information, one could conjecture that low Medicaid participation rates among GIs could potentially have a more severe impact on health-care access and outcomes for underserved populations. At present, funding and human resources are being employed across the state of Connecticut to address bottlenecks in colorectal cancer screening. More specifically, patient navigation and outreach programs are emerging and expanding to address the gaps in services for hard-to-reach populations and the medically underserved. Low Medicaid participation rates and increased wait times for colonoscopy screening may impair the efficacy of colorectal cancer patient navigation and outreach efforts and potentially funding for future interventions. In this study, we report the results of our secret-shopper telephone survey comprising of 93 group and independent gastroenterologist (GI) practices in different counties of Connecticut. METHODS: Reviewing online resources and yellow pages, researchers compiled a county-specific list of GI practices throughout Connecticut and conducted a secret-shopper survey by telephone. A standard script and set of questions was formulated and used for each telephone call to GI practices. Data was analyzed in context of statistics available to the public at large from the U.S. Census Bureau. RESULTS: Overall, 46% of all 93 practices and 62% of individual GIs from all 93 practices state-wide reported Medicaid participation. About 35% of surveyed practices were independent practices; 41% of these reported Medicaid participation. About 65% of surveyed practices were group practices; 49% of these reported Medicaid participation. Approximately, 85% of all practices are in Fairfield, Hartford, orNew Haven counties. Of all three counties, New Haven reported the highest Medicaid participation rate by practices; 62% of all practices in New Haven reported participation. Fairfield reported the lowest Medicaid participation rate by practices; 29% of all practices in Fairfield reported participation. When Medicaid participation rates were calculated for total number of gastroenterologists from all practices in a given county (as opposed to participation rates by number of practices), Medicaid participation rates were 80% and 44% for New Haven and Fairfield, respectively. Of all practices in Hartford, only 50% reported Medicaid participation, whereas 67% of the total number of gastroenterologists (as opposed to practices) reported Medicaid participation. According to a recent national survey, 47% of gastroenterologists reported stopping accepting new Medicaid patients. Overall minimum and maximum wait times were reported to be the highest for Hartford, but wait times were long even for smaller counties, reflecting a possible imbalance in supply and demand or inefficiency in allocating the available resources. CONCLUSIONS: Only a limited number of gastroenterology practices in Connecticut accept Medicaid patients, notably in selected counties, but in all counties, and this may add to access barriers. It is yet unclear whether these disparities are significant enough to create a supply-demand imbalance and thus, have a significantly negative impact on health outcomes for the underserved. Nevertheless, with the high unemployment rates and impending implementation of mandated state-wide health-care reform as outlined in the Affordable Care Act, the Medicaid population in the state of Connecticut will increase, increasing future demand for services. In addition, based on the survey findings, longer wait times for colonoscopy screening are reported for the many of GI practices in Connecticut for Medicaid-insured as well as non-Medicaid patients. Longer wait times may have an impact on patient compliance, especially for the underserved populations that are hard to reach and ensure follow-up, contributing to potential delayed diagnosis. A Medicaid-associated disparity in this area will serve to exacerbate the problem for the underserved compared to those relatively well served. Those currently not seeking screening are at even higher risk of contributing to the higher mortality rate, and we need to find out how best to ensure that we can more uniformly apply screening and have the capacity to do so.