Gastrointestinal Manifestations and Outcomes of COVID-19: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Introduction Pulmonary symptoms are the most prominent manifestations of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms have been reported widely as well. Literature describing the relation of these symptoms with outcomes of COVID-19 patients is limited in terms of sample size, geographic diversity, and the spectrum of GI symptoms included. We aim to evaluate the association of GI symptoms with outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies assessing GI symptoms and outcomes in COVID-19 patients were undertaken using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria and the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) checklist. Details on outcomes included ICU vs. non-ICU admission, severe vs. non-severe disease, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) vs. no-IMV use, oxygen saturation <90% vs. >90%, in-hospital mortality vs. discharged alive and survivors. We obtained the odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (95%CI), and forest plots. Sensitivity analysis was used to analyze publication bias and heterogeneity. Results In 35 studies with 7931 confirmed COVID-19 patients, we found that anorexia (pooled OR:2.05; 95%CI: 1.36-3.09, p=0.0006) and abdominal pain (OR 2.80; 95%CI: 1.41-5.54, p=0.003) were associated with a higher risk of poor outcomes and no such association was found for diarrhea (OR 1.04; 95%CI: 0.85-1.26, p=0.71), nausea (OR 0.73; 95%CI: 0.38-1.39, p=0.34) and vomiting (OR 1.24; 95%CI 0.86-1.79, p=0.25). Conclusion The meta-analysis concludes that anorexia and abdominal pain are associated with poor outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, while diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting have no association. Future research should focus on whether detecting GI invasion in conjunction with fecal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing can aid in the early triage of high-risk individuals and improve outcomes.

Prevalence and Predictors of Young-Onset Colorectal Neoplasia: Insights From a Nationally Representative Colonoscopy Registry.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A disturbing increase in early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) has prompted recent guidelines to recommend lowering the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening starting age from 50 to 45 years old for average-risk individuals. Little is known about the prevalence of colorectal neoplasia in individuals between 45 and 49 years old, or even younger, in the United States. We analyzed a large, nationally representative data set of almost 3 million outpatient colonoscopies to determine the prevalence of, and risk factors for, colorectal neoplasia among patients aged 18 to 54. METHODS: Findings from high-quality colonoscopies were analyzed from AMSURG ambulatory endoscopy centers (ASCs) that report their results in the GI Quality Improvement Consortium (GIQuIC) Registry. Logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for EOCRC. RESULTS: Increasing age, male sex, White race, family history of CRC, and examinations for bleeding or screening were all associated with higher odds of advanced premalignant lesions (APLs) and CRC. Among patients aged 45 to 49, 32% had any neoplasia, 7.5% had APLs, and 0.58% had CRC. Rates were almost as high in those aged 40 to 44. Family history of CRC portended neoplasia rates 5 years earlier. Rates of APLs were higher in American Indian/Alaskan Natives, but lower among Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics, compared with White counterparts. The prevalence of any neoplasia and APL gradually increased between 2014 and 2019, in all age groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide support for lowering the screening age to 45 for all average-risk individuals. Early messaging to patients and providers in the years leading up to age 45 is warranted, especially in those with a family history of CRC.

Discharge against medical advice among neurological patients: Characteristics and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To study characteristics and outcomes of patients with stroke, traumatic brain injury (TBI), and epilepsy with discharge against medical advice (DAMA). DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Retrospective analysis of the 2013 Nationwide Readmissions Database, a nationally representative inpatient administrative dataset. STUDY DESIGN: Associations between predictors and DAMA at index admission were analyzed using adjusted logistic models. We examined 30-day all-cause readmissions. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years at index admission for International Classification of Diseases-9 diagnosis code of epilepsy, TBI, or stroke were included. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Discharge against medical advice occurred in 1998/58278 patients (3.43 percent) in the epilepsy group, 1762/211 213 (0.83 percent) in the stroke group, and 1289/74 652 (1.73 percent) in the TBI group. Factors consistently associated with increased likelihood of DAMA included lower age, male sex, non-Medicare and nonprivate insurance, lower socioeconomic status, and behavioral risk factors (smoking history, alcohol history, and drug use). The crude 30-day all-cause readmission rate for those with DAMA from their index admission was 16.4 percent for the stroke cohort, 13.9 percent for epilepsy, and 13.4 percent for TBI. DAMA at index admission was significantly associated with increased risk of 30-day all-cause readmission among all groups (adjusted odds ratio 1.79, 95% CI: 1.65-1.94, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Age, sex, insurance status, socioeconomic status, and behavioral factors were associated with DAMA in neurological patients. Further research is needed to develop interventions to reduce DAMA in high-risk groups.