Hepatitis C in Pregnancy.

The prevalence of hepatitis C in pregnancy is as high as 3.6% in large cohorts. The prevalence of hepatitis C acquired by vertical transmission is 0.2% to 0.4% in the United States and Europe. Although screening is not recommended in the absence of certain risk factors, the importance of understanding hepatitis C in pregnancy lies in its association with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. There is potential for those infants infected by vertical transmission to develop chronic hepatitis C, cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma. The risk of vertical transmission is increased when mothers are co-infected with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) or possess a high viral load. There is no clear data supporting that mode of delivery increases or reduces risk. Breastfeeding is not associated with increased risk of transmission. Premature rupture of membranes, invasive procedures (such as amniocentesis), intrapartum events, or fetal scalp monitoring may increase risk of transmission. In pregnant patients, hepatitis C is diagnosed with a positive ELISA-3 and detectable Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) RNA viral load. Infants born to HCV-infected mothers should be tested for either HCV RNA on at least two separate occasions. Although prevention is not possible, there may be a role for newer direct acting anti-viral medications in the future.

Eosinophilic colitis.

Eosinophilic colitis (EC) is a rare form of primary eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease with a bimodal peak of prevalence in neonates and young adults. EC remains a little understood condition in contrast to the increasingly recognized eosinophilic esophagitis. Clinical presentation of EC is highly variable according to mucosal, transmural, or serosal predominance of inflammation. EC has a broad differential diagnosis because colon tissue eosinophilia often occurs in parasitic infection, drug-induced allergic reactions, inflammatory bowel disease, and various connective tissue disorders, which require thorough searching for secondary causes that may be specifically treated with antibiotics or dietary and drug elimination. Like eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease involving other segments of the gastrointestinal tract, EC responds very well to steroids that may be spared by using antihistamines, leukotriene inhibitors and biologics.

EUS followed by EMR for staging of high-grade dysplasia and early cancer in Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND: Accurate staging of high-grade dysplasia and of early cancer in Barrett's esophagus is important in the selection of patients for endoscopic therapy. METHODS: Patients with Barrett's esophagus and biopsy specimen proven high-grade dysplasia and adenocarcinoma in focal nodular lesions or in endoscopically unapparent flat lesions in short-segment Barrett's esophagus were initially staged with EUS. In patients with disease limited to the mucosa on EUS, cap-assisted EMR was performed. The depth of tumor invasion on EMR specimens was classified in a similar manner to squamous-cell cancer of the esophagus: m1 (epithelial layer, dysplasia), m2 (lamina propria invasion), m3 (muscularis mucosae invasion), sm (submucosal invasion). RESULTS: EUS was performed in 48 consecutive patients (27 with focal nodular lesions and 21 with microscopic lesions), and submucosal invasion was diagnosed in 8 (confirmed in 7/8 at surgery). EMR was carried out in the remaining 40 patients without significant complications. In the 25 patients with high-grade dysplasia on prior biopsy specimens, EMR confirmed m1 disease in 19; whereas in 6 (24%), invasive adenocarcinoma was detected (to m2 in 4; to m3 in 2). In the 15 patients with invasive cancer on prior biopsy specimens and staged as intramucosal cancer on EUS, intramucosal carcinoma was confirmed in 9 (m2 in 3; m3 in 6); whereas, in 6 patients (40%), submucosal invasion was found. Overall, EUS provided accurate staging in 41/48 patients (85%) with one patient overstaged and 6 patients understaged compared with pathologic staging obtained by surgery or EMR. Of the 34 patients with m1 to m3 staging after EMR, 29 were treated endoscopically and had no evidence of cancer after a mean follow-up of 22.9 months(standard deviation 9.2 months). CONCLUSIONS: EMR provides pathologic staging information that, in addition, may be helpful after EUS if a stage-determined approach is used in the management of high-grade dysplasia and of early cancer in Barrett's esophagus. EMR may be particularly useful for staging of focal nodules or in short-segment Barrett's esophagus with microscopic lesions when endoscopic therapy is an option.