Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center

priate starting point for consultation by specialists. Substantial overlap exists among the patients whom these guidelines address and those discussed in the recently published guidelines for health care-associated pneumonia (HCAP). Pneumonia in nonambulatory residents of nursing homes and other long-term care facilities epidemiologically mirrors hospital-acquired pneumonia and should be treated according to the HCAP guidelines. However, certain other patients whose conditions are included in the designation of HCAP are better served by management in accordance with CAP guidelines with concern for specific pathogens.

Abstract Somatic mutations in cancer genomes are caused by multiple mutational processes, each of which generates a characteristic mutational signature 1 . Here, as part of the Pan-Cancer Analysis of Whole Genomes (PCAWG) Consortium 2 of the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), we characterized mutational signatures using 84,729,690 somatic mutations from 4,645 whole-genome and 19,184 exome sequences that encompass most types of cancer. We identified 49 single-base-substitution, 11 doublet-base-substitution, 4 clustered-base-substitution and 17 small insertion-and-deletion signatures. The substantial size of our dataset, compared with previous analyses 3–15 , enabled the discovery of new signatures, the separation of overlapping signatures and the decomposition of signatures into components that may represent associated—but distinct—DNA damage, repair and/or replication mechanisms. By estimating the contribution of each signature to the mutational catalogues of individual cancer genomes, we revealed associations of signatures to exogenous or endogenous exposures, as well as to defective DNA-maintenance processes. However, many signatures are of unknown cause. This analysis provides a systematic perspective on the repertoire of mutational processes that contribute to the development of human cancer.

Each year, more than half a million people worldwide receive a diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma related to HCV is the fastest rising cause of U.S. cancer-related deaths. This review summarizes recent advances in prevention, surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment.

Most cases of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are associated with cirrhosis related to chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Changes in the time trends of HCC and most variations in its age-, sex-, and race-specific rates among different regions are likely to be related to differences in hepatitis viruses that are most prevalent in a population, the timing of their spread, and the ages of the individuals the viruses infect. Environmental, host genetic, and viral factors can affect the risk of HCC in individuals with HBV or HCV infection. This review summarizes the risk factors for HCC among HBV- or HCV-infected individuals, based on findings from epidemiologic studies and meta-analyses, as well as determinants of patient outcome and the HCC disease burden, globally and in the United States.

Abstract Cancer is driven by genetic change, and the advent of massively parallel sequencing has enabled systematic documentation of this variation at the whole-genome scale 1–3 . Here we report the integrative analysis of 2,658 whole-cancer genomes and their matching normal tissues across 38 tumour types from the Pan-Cancer Analysis of Whole Genomes (PCAWG) Consortium of the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). We describe the generation of the PCAWG resource, facilitated by international data sharing using compute clouds. On average, cancer genomes contained 4–5 driver mutations when combining coding and non-coding genomic elements; however, in around 5% of cases no drivers were identified, suggesting that cancer driver discovery is not yet complete. Chromothripsis, in which many clustered structural variants arise in a single catastrophic event, is frequently an early event in tumour evolution; in acral melanoma, for example, these events precede most somatic point mutations and affect several cancer-associated genes simultaneously. Cancers with abnormal telomere maintenance often originate from tissues with low replicative activity and show several mechanisms of preventing telomere attrition to critical levels. Common and rare germline variants affect patterns of somatic mutation, including point mutations, structural variants and somatic retrotransposition. A collection of papers from the PCAWG Consortium describes non-coding mutations that drive cancer beyond those in the TERT promoter 4 ; identifies new signatures of mutational processes that cause base substitutions, small insertions and deletions and structural variation 5,6 ; analyses timings and patterns of tumour evolution 7 ; describes the diverse transcriptional consequences of somatic mutation on splicing, expression levels, fusion genes and promoter activity 8,9 ; and evaluates a range of more-specialized features of cancer genomes 8,10–18 .

The principal limitations of the terms NAFLD and NASH are the reliance on exclusionary confounder terms and the use of potentially stigmatising language. This study set out to determine if content experts and patient advocates were in favor of a change in nomenclature and/or definition. A modified Delphi process was led by three large pan-national liver associations. The consensus was defined a priori as a supermajority (67%) vote. An independent committee of experts external to the nomenclature process made the final recommendation on the acronym and its diagnostic criteria. A total of 236 panelists from 56 countries participated in 4 online surveys and 2 hybrid meetings. Response rates across the 4 survey rounds were 87%, 83%, 83%, and 78%, respectively. Seventy-four percent of respondents felt that the current nomenclature was sufficiently flawed to consider a name change. The terms "nonalcoholic" and "fatty" were felt to be stigmatising by 61% and 66% of respondents, respectively. Steatotic liver disease was chosen as an overarching term to encompass the various aetiologies of steatosis. The term steatohepatitis was felt to be an important pathophysiological concept that should be retained. The name chosen to replace NAFLD was metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease. There was consensus to change the definition to include the presence of at least 1 of 5 cardiometabolic risk factors. Those with no metabolic parameters and no known cause were deemed to have cryptogenic steatotic liver disease. A new category, outside pure metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, termed metabolic and alcohol related/associated liver disease (MetALD), was selected to describe those with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, who consume greater amounts of alcohol per week (140-350 g/wk and 210-420 g/wk for females and males, respectively). The new nomenclature and diagnostic criteria are widely supported and nonstigmatising, and can improve awareness and patient identification.

Important progress has been made in the management of Helicobacter pylori infection and in this fifth edition of the Maastricht Consensus Report, key aspects related to the clinical role of H. pylori were re-evaluated in 2015. In the Maastricht V/Florence Consensus Conference, 43 experts from 24 countries examined new data related to H. pylori in five subdivided workshops: (1) Indications/Associations, (2) Diagnosis, (3) Treatment, (4) Prevention/Public Health, (5) H. pylori and the Gastric Microbiota. The results of the individual workshops were presented to a final consensus voting that included all participants. Recommendations are provided on the basis of the best available evidence and relevance to the management of H. pylori infection in the various clinical scenarios.

The principal limitations of the terms NAFLD and NASH are the reliance on exclusionary confounder terms and the use of potentially stigmatising language. This study set out to determine if content experts and patient advocates were in favour of a change in nomenclature and/or definition. A modified Delphi process was led by three large pan-national liver associations. The consensus was defined a priori as a supermajority (67%) vote. An independent committee of experts external to the nomenclature process made the final recommendation on the acronym and its diagnostic criteria. A total of 236 panellists from 56 countries participated in 4 online surveys and 2 hybrid meetings. Response rates across the 4 survey rounds were 87%, 83%, 83%, and 78%, respectively. Seventy-four percent of respondents felt that the current nomenclature was sufficiently flawed to consider a name change. The terms "nonalcoholic" and "fatty" were felt to be stigmatising by 61% and 66% of respondents, respectively. Steatotic liver disease was chosen as an overarching term to encompass the various aetiologies of steatosis. The term steatohepatitis was felt to be an important pathophysiological concept that should be retained. The name chosen to replace NAFLD was metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). There was consensus to change the definition to include the presence of at least 1 of 5 cardiometabolic risk factors. Those with no metabolic parameters and no known cause were deemed to have cryptogenic steatotic liver disease. A new category, outside pure metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, termed metabolic and alcohol related/associated liver disease (MetALD), was selected to describe those with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, who consume greater amounts of alcohol per week (140-350 g/wk and 210-420 g/wk for females and males, respectively). The new nomenclature and diagnostic criteria are widely supported and non-stigmatising, and can improve awareness and patient identification.

BACKGROUND: Many patients report symptomatic relief after undergoing arthroscopy of the knee for osteoarthritis, but it is unclear how the procedure achieves this result. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of arthroscopy for osteoarthritis of the knee. METHODS: A total of 180 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee were randomly assigned to receive arthroscopic débridement, arthroscopic lavage, or placebo surgery. Patients in the placebo group received skin incisions and underwent a simulated débridement without insertion of the arthroscope. Patients and assessors of outcome were blinded to the treatment-group assignment. Outcomes were assessed at multiple points over a 24-month period with the use of five self-reported scores--three on scales for pain and two on scales for function--and one objective test of walking and stair climbing. A total of 165 patients completed the trial. RESULTS: At no point did either of the intervention groups report less pain or better function than the placebo group. For example, mean (+/-SD) scores on the Knee-Specific Pain Scale (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe pain) were similar in the placebo, lavage, and débridement groups: 48.9+/-21.9, 54.8+/-19.8, and 51.7+/-22.4, respectively, at one year (P=0.14 for the comparison between placebo and lavage; P=0.51 for the comparison between placebo and débridement) and 51.6+/-23.7, 53.7+/-23.7, and 51.4+/-23.2, respectively, at two years (P=0.64 and P=0.96, respectively). Furthermore, the 95 percent confidence intervals for the differences between the placebo group and the intervention groups exclude any clinically meaningful difference. CONCLUSIONS: In this controlled trial involving patients with osteoarthritis of the knee, the outcomes after arthroscopic lavage or arthroscopic débridement were no better than those after a placebo procedure.

OBJECTIVE: To present results of the Kyoto Global Consensus Meeting, which was convened to develop global consensus on (1) classification of chronic gastritis and duodenitis, (2) clinical distinction of dyspepsia caused by Helicobacter pylori from functional dyspepsia, (3) appropriate diagnostic assessment of gastritis and (4) when, whom and how to treat H. pylori gastritis. DESIGN: Twenty-three clinical questions addressing the above-mentioned four domains were drafted for which expert panels were asked to formulate relevant statements. A Delphi method using an anonymous electronic system was adopted to develop the consensus, the level of which was predefined as ≥80%. Final modifications of clinical questions and consensus were achieved at the face-to-face meeting in Kyoto. RESULTS: All 24 statements for 22 clinical questions after extensive modifications and omission of one clinical question were achieved with a consensus level of >80%. To better organise classification of gastritis and duodenitis based on aetiology, a new classification of gastritis and duodenitis is recommended for the 11th international classification. A new category of H. pylori-associated dyspepsia together with a diagnostic algorithm was proposed. The adoption of grading systems for gastric cancer risk stratification, and modern image-enhancing endoscopy for the diagnosis of gastritis, were recommended. Treatment to eradicate H. pylori infection before preneoplastic changes develop, if feasible, was recommended to minimise the risk of more serious complications of the infection. CONCLUSIONS: A global consensus for gastritis was developed for the first time, which will be the basis for an international classification system and for further research on the subject.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is arguably the most common disease encountered by the gastroenterologist. It is equally likely that the primary care providers will find that complaints related to reflux disease constitute a large proportion of their practice. The following guideline will provide an overview of GERD and its presentation, and recommendations for the approach to diagnosis and management of this common and important disease. The document will review the presentations of any risk factors for GERD, the diagnostic modalities and their recommendation for use and recommendations for medical, surgical and endoscopic management including comparative effectiveness of different treatments. Extraesophageal symptoms and complications will be addressed as will the evaluation and management of “refractory” GERD. The document will conclude with the potential risks and side effects of the main treatments for GERD and their implications for patient management. Each section of the document will present the key recommendations related to the section topic and a subsequent summary of the evidence supporting those recommendations. An overall summary of the key recommendations is presented in Table 1. A search of OVID Medline, Pubmed and ISI Web of Science was conducted for the years from 1960–2011 using the following major search terms and subheadings including “heartburn”, “acid regurgitation”, “GERD”, “lifestyle interventions”, “proton pump inhibitor (PPI)”, “endoscopic surgery,” “extraesophageal symptoms,” “Nissen fundoplication,” and “GERD complications.” We used systematic reviews and meta-analyses for each topic when available followed by a review of clinical trials.Table 1: Summary and strength of recommendationsTable 1: (continued)The GRADE system was used to evaluate the strength of the recommendations and the overall level of evidence (1,2). The level of evidence could range from “high” (implying that further research was unlikely to change the authors’ confidence in the estimate of the effect) to “moderate” (further research would be likely to have an impact on the confidence in the estimate of effect) or “low” (further research would be expected to have an important impact on the confidence in the estimate of the effect and would be likely to change the estimate). The strength of a recommendation was graded as “strong” when the desirable effects of an intervention clearly outweigh the undesirable effects and as “conditional” when there is uncertainty about the trade-offs. It is important to be aware that GERD is defined by consensus and as such is a disease comprising symptoms, end-organ effects and complications related to the reflux of gastric contents into the esophagus, oral cavity, and/or the lung. Taking into account the multiple consensus definitions previously published (3,4,5), the authors have used the following working definition to define the disease: GERD should be defined as symptoms or complications resulting from the reflux of gastric contents into the esophagus or beyond, into the oral cavity (including larynx) or lung. GERD can be further classified as the presence of symptoms without erosions on endoscopic examination (non-erosive disease or NERD) or GERD symptoms with erosions present (ERD). SYMPTOMS AND EPIDEMIOLOGY Epidemiologic estimates of the prevalence of GERD are based primarily on the typical symptoms of heartburn and regurgitation. A systematic review found the prevalence of GERD to be 10–20% of the Western world with a lower prevalence in Asia (6). Clinically troublesome heartburn is seen in about 6% of the population (7). Regurgitation was reported in 16% in the systematic review noted above. Chest pain may be a symptom of GERD, even the presenting symptom (2,3). Distinguishing cardiac from non-cardiac chest pain is required before considering GERD as a cause of chest pain. Although the symptom of dysphagia can be associated with uncomplicated GERD, its presence warrants investigation for a potential complication including an underlying motility disorder, stricture, ring, or malignancy (8). Chronic cough, asthma, chronic laryngitis, other airway symptoms and so-called extraesophageal symptoms are discussed in a subsequent section. Atypical symptoms including dyspepsia, epigastric pain, nausea, bloating, and belching may be indicative of GERD but overlap with other conditions. A systematic review found that ∼38% of the general population complained of dyspepsia. Dyspepsia was more frequent in GERD patients than those without. These patients were at risk for a new diagnosis of GERD. Epigastric pain, early satiety, belching and bloating were more likely to respond to a PPI with symptoms can be to be associated with GERD respond to a PPI A systematic review on the of GERD on of with GERD or an in and in on were seen with patients with frequent A in was seen GERD a impact on with symptoms and are to when the GERD patient The of evidence that symptom change as the of symptoms may the of the prevalence of and esophagus in prevalence in are the of GERD in from with are more likely to be and are more likely to have esophagus is more frequent in with The for is to be to is a GERD and an and the presence of symptoms and complications of GERD including and esophagus The likely the of its used to risk factors for The for of as It is of that there a and of the esophagus and gastric the diagnosis of diagnosis of GERD is using of symptom presentation, with reflux and to The symptoms of heartburn and are the most for a diagnosis based on are as as most A systematic review of found the of heartburn and for the presence of to be and the from PPI PPI is a approach to GERD when is in patients with typical A to would the a of this approach with a of and of a PPI for GERD and of chest pain associated with the presence of GERD, and can be the presenting A found a that non-cardiac chest pain to the and effectiveness of a PPI in in patients with chest pain in a cardiac cause a more systematic review that the of non-cardiac chest pain to a PPI was than in patients with evidence of GERD on and/or The to with was in the of of GERD. a diagnostic evaluation with and should be before a PPI The presence of heartburn in with chest pain was of PPI of the chest pain an symptom or and an for early to a GERD symptoms have associated with GERD, based on of chronic and have associated with GERD. These are discussed in the heartburn and symptoms of GERD as non-cardiac chest pain. symptoms, associated with GERD, are as The GERD and the so-called and extraesophageal with a have of the potential diagnostic in the patient with symptoms, including GERD. Although with can of the overall of this is The of reflux the with or without including the the of the to be as a diagnostic without dysphagia The the primary used to evaluate the in patients with symptoms to GERD. of GERD and a esophagus to be for the diagnosis of GERD when is seen and the is used the of patients with heartburn and will have erosions as an diagnostic in patients with GERD for of and and for Although risk factors for esophagus have symptoms the and of symptoms for the of for a that may be to for in in the of with chronic GERD symptoms The of any esophagus associated with GERD and the for a of patients were found to have The of as an to an endoscopic examination of the prevalence of the esophagus in patients with symptoms to for in the of an that GERD from using is and risks a diagnosis and without in the esophagus of GERD are a may be seen with GERD and respond to The of the other of the and even are of clinical are the of based on The use of of the esophagus to GERD be in a patient with heartburn and a based on the of from a to be in GERD patients is of in the primary diagnosis of GERD. a lower the presence of a motility is to a diagnosis of GERD. should be used to in of and is before of primarily to or that would be to but to the reflux or is the that for the presence of reflux and symptom with reflux with a or and in patients with the is lower in those with reflux symptoms when a diagnostic is more likely to be A consensus that to the of reflux to to patient and the to the to or to The for and on and in and to symptoms with for the of and of or use of is as is to on or a diagnostic and for evaluation before considering in a patient with an is The use of on and in GERD is discussed symptom is the is more The symptom most used are symptom and symptom have that have and to the of symptom to to is the and have when is in a patient with A on with a symptom GERD as a cause for symptoms but are for any symptom other than patient a or may the for a intervention and a the that the symptoms are unlikely to be to should be used in and other reflux as the have to be into The and GERD is a is the of this most discussed is of should be of an of GERD and patients on and subsequent of the to the of risk of gastric A of found in GERD in patients with symptoms were with those in patients with disease the new of GERD symptoms for the use of PPI in patients with of the potential for of in patients on PPI a and review that that the evidence was to of patients on The in this and of on to of GERD patients for the recommendation in of GERD is frequent as and may in any found of in the in the and in the an heartburn in the in the and in the of reported heartburn before their of heartburn are heartburn before and is with and in with the of its frequent heartburn and of were risk factors for frequent GERD symptoms other GERD symptom in The diagnosis of GERD should be based on symptoms and diagnostic is required for the of patients with GERD. the patient is the of but should be for patients symptoms are to or have should be the It is to of are of for GERD. is of and of and of that can reflux symptoms including such as and and with of for systematic review the effect of and other on lower and GERD of and and were to lower of the lower of and and was an in with and in to of and and were to or GERD there have conducted to that have clinical in GERD symptoms or complications associated with of or A systematic review that there was of evidence that of or GERD even in with a associated with new of GERD symptoms have in GERD symptoms with gastric but to be in of GERD symptoms A large based on the a in frequent GERD symptoms for their by or more with of the associated with of and GERD have in GERD symptoms and with of using or for patients or PPI A published in that the in GERD clinical and was lower in patients with and PPI with with PPI associated with and with and for patients with A for of using PPI with or The overall proportion of or was with or a and more heartburn are associated with a of symptom in patients with to patients with the symptom patients with reflux a systematic review for PPI with and for heartburn the of with the risk for heartburn primary in for PPI was confidence for and for a were more than and are available including that can be and are available by and to in for symptom A published in of PPI for of for and there was a in the of of with an risk of and to of The by of were and an in the of GERD symptom at The clinical of this is of the with the of and should be before to an to more gastric in the of with other when each is at this effect to any clinical including symptom further is a PPI in of with in in and the of to the any of the of to in of was in with in would be expected that of patients with would on PPI and of patients with of GERD symptoms a of PPI found in of patients and in patients PPI or The evaluation and management of patients with are discussed in the GERD section. factors for of symptom have patients with of presence of extraesophageal symptoms, and of are most in when before a and are when at The to this to be for the of to have in of and can when at is common in Although PPI is common in clinical there is to this practice. from that in GERD patients to patients to was as as to is to more than in or PPI should be for GERD patients to have symptoms PPI is and in patients with complications including and patients found to have of the patients will of patients found to have will by patients found to have any of have a risk for in patients PPI the other have that patients with and GERD can be with or PPI a published in of patients to of on were in at with of patients on a systematic review of PPI were in with and and with The for patients in the were to for patients on PPI and to in patients with but for patients with to is for patients for GERD patients with to PPI are The of for patients with symptoms to approach multiple potential of a of of this and a of clinical use of a be most on as in patients with symptoms and patients with evidence on of reflux PPI with in to PPI is for to and gastric of to PPI of with to be more with or The of by system side effects including and in of patients in the of there is for in GERD. the of patients may from a is a can be for an from the as have for in GERD. The of to be to that of for gastric but to are available in GERD for is to a risk for and cardiac The of is for GERD a to be in GERD by its to and reflux to the of and reflux reflux and belching the for GERD symptoms to a of at a of a can be in patients with of reflux PPI based on that with this The should be aware that there published of in GERD. is by side effects of and is by the for the of GERD. for surgical for GERD or in the to GERD patients for may to associated with the presence of a large to or symptoms to be by GERD. the of patients found to have of reflux on PPI with symptom may be for symptoms including nausea, and epigastric pain are likely to The surgical are seen in patients with typical symptoms of heartburn and/or that to PPI or have with symptom this patient can be expected to be and in to a of a to surgical for GERD, of the patients in the were using with of the surgical at years a of patients to with of the were in with of the patients symptoms of more common in the surgical to surgical for GERD may risks including risk of The most common associated with the in of A that the prevalence of dysphagia and to were lower in patients with patients a with to or surgical were reported in with were was evidence to that symptoms of and bloating were more with but a proportion of reported of complications were but was associated with a potential for in patients with extraesophageal symptoms have patients in a change in were of even in patients with A of and for symptoms for and surgical with but change in at a or surgical was associated with in symptoms, or use of Although can be in patients with extraesophageal or symptoms, are lower than in patients with heartburn It is important to evaluate patients with so-called reflux before considering A to PPI is the of a PPI is unlikely to be even with an the prevalence of in the gastric a more common with A review the for surgical for on reflux gastric GERD symptoms when was more with gastric in the in GERD symptoms, but the other change or an in reflux The effects of gastric on GERD symptoms in were for GERD have but have These to the lower into the lower and endoscopic of the of in or the for patients to and were from the have a to a from the of this are to a of and of A that at of the of patients required or a using the system of to years in the of the of in a of by the based on a clinical in GERD found that of in symptom and with side effects than in are required before can be risks associated with associated with PPI have and in of to PPI can be in patients or in patients to respond to an supporting this are potential have and with including and and and in patients using The the potential for and PPI in and potential for PPI in of multiple meta-analyses and systematic reviews have The for potential in PPI from the that the in gastric and in to from there was supporting clinical evidence to document the of in chronic PPI have that in PPI is more likely to and should be in this is to of and from reported in patients with gastric or is the of in on PPI their effects in gastric the of may of and to including and A systematic review published in found an in PPI for from in in and in of a The to an were in patients years of of the presence of and associated the of PPI the risk of the of the available PPI can be a risk for and other and should be used with care in patients at An risk for be clearly in with PPI A systematic review and A of the that the overall risk of was patients using and when the were use of was associated with an risk of A more found an risk of associated with PPI but the were by of use was associated with an of chronic use was have an risk of associated with PPI PPI should be in patients to a potential risk of the diagnosis of and of of PPI further in gastric associated with of from and Although have that clinical have the the with the to with at the or were to with PPI use the years was associated with at the or the and was that the PPI use and was related to factors of A that the risk PPI was present in with at other risk meta-analyses published in in risk of but were by the a the potential for in of PPI and of and The from the that the of by the required for of for a potential based on in that to was in the presence of with an risk for and of effect the risk of in patients have that the strength of potential is the of clinical for and in a including published the authors the primary or and for cardiac symptoms or from the of for an risk for The of primary a of for The for a of based on published and primary and were the for published an overall of The authors that in patients using and PPI the risk of cardiac was based on from from and the of the likely to of for potential meta-analyses have that the from an and that of from the of the was by Extraesophageal presentations of chronic cough, and The of clinical presentations to GERD from typical symptoms of heartburn and to an of extraesophageal including and have an GERD and extraesophageal symptoms, but be from A systematic review of found that symptoms of GERD and were present in and of but that there was to the of in this that GERD may be the cause in of chronic A large population found for and chronic in with or with The GERD and asthma, chronic cough, and laryngitis, that have a and that reflux may be a than a The consensus the of extraesophageal in without typical symptoms of GERD available diagnostic to GERD as the cause of extraesophageal symptoms have and have to a of in with extraesophageal patients with asthma, chronic cough, or should have evaluation for GERD should be as a in but patients presenting with clinical GERD as the cause of extraesophageal symptoms to be can document the presence of GERD when is but is found in of patients with GERD symptoms and is even with when a diagnosis of asthma, chronic cough, or reflux can the presence of GERD by a of consensus is that the of the is is the most and reflux is in the reported prevalence of in patients with chronic and to the of on of reflux on GERD as the cause of the extraesophageal the other a reflux should the diagnostic the presence of reflux may be used to the symptoms are to The most used to evaluate the reflux and symptoms are the symptom and the on and symptom by the with reflux by the reflux may document a reflux and or The and of symptom is and there are to of extraesophageal GERD based on this A of patients with extraesophageal reflux symptoms that were to found that the presence of heartburn or on to of but the or The of by to reflux or with of cough, the of cough, a more of the reflux and a using this approach was to document as as reflux the of symptom in patients with to reflux further and are used to It should be that or more of in of in a in a of and of was for as as and of was for It is important to in that of may be the of such as or is that a diagnosis of be based on A of that is in clinical is to with in patients with typical symptoms of GERD. have that in of a of that PPI in with in a but overall a in that is unlikely to be of clinical there is evidence to for when other GERD symptoms are in was in the that required evidence of GERD symptoms, or reflux with the that evidence of GERD. A of found for PPI with for of to found in in those PPI to The with symptoms to reflux disease is A of found that PPI in of symptoms of chronic to are the effectiveness of for the of extraesophageal symptoms of GERD. A for and review on the comparative effectiveness of GERD treatments the available on for asthma, cough, and in in this the on for extraesophageal GERD from surgical with in population of symptoms, surgical and of Although of may the of the review was that the strength of the evidence was and could be to the of the PPI in patients with asthma, chronic cough, and have typical symptoms of GERD or evidence of GERD by or reflux with to be to and typical the extraesophageal symptoms will is We have to patients will respond to for patients without typical symptoms or evidence of GERD be The recommendation is to patients with PPI than patients with typical GERD this is based on and are with PPI and respond to a of can be and as in the section. The of in this of patients is GERD to with We are of patients with for symptoms that are to be to GERD respond to The GERD a of patients that may in symptom and PPI or and to to Although there is consensus the definition of GERD in terms of symptom of and PPI at should that GERD is a GERD a impact on A systematic review of found that reflux symptoms on PPI are associated with and any patient for symptoms that are to GERD and that with a PPI evaluation and management. patients to respond to will have GERD, the most important of the diagnostic evaluation in patients is to those with reflux as the cause of the symptoms, from those with The reported proportion of patients with heartburn respond to likely to definitions of patient and different It that to symptoms in to of patients with a PPI A systematic review found troublesome typical symptoms of GERD and in of patients in primary care and of patients in The proportion of patients with extraesophageal presentations of GERD that respond to is but the of extraesophageal reflux symptoms is lower than that for typical symptoms A of PPI and found that PPI to be more common in those with factors associated with PPI were of and The in the management of GERD is to PPI by and is associated with of to PPI to PPI was found in of patients with GERD in a large The of discussed is when are before a PPI was seen in of patients were for GERD symptoms A of found that of primary care and of in the patients to the PPI at or that the to was important any patient with symptoms should be of the PPI and are a of a different PPI can be evidence from a this to be in patients A in patients with GERD symptoms a of that PPI to or to PPI in in of without a for with symptoms of PPI further with symptoms should to such as can present with symptoms to PPI and to for the patient with a that evidence of Although the prevalence of in patients with GERD in the a found that to in GERD patients is when the prevalence of is or is as is the the is to reflux to reflux and the reflux and the should be in patients with extraesophageal symptoms that PPI and in have and for the evaluation of reflux disease and pump further of the as the may PPI with will of to reflux but may respond to or GERD patients with a reflux those with heartburn may be classified as those with extraesophageal symptoms cough, will or for key to are reflux should be PPI or on and to use or the present there are and consensus the for GERD. The approach to may be based on the clinical and of GERD, as as on the available and as as on PPI important and as PPI of can be with any of the available or or reflux is and a GERD is a patient with a can be and the diagnostic should be the other a PPI evidence of GERD but provide the for the to respond to on PPI should be with to of The of without in a patient a PPI is in patients reflux in of patients with GERD that were on PPI Although an in a patient a PPI reflux is evidence of or A in patients reflux as the cause of their symptoms but account for the of can be using A that used the to evaluate patients to PPI found that symptoms were related to reflux in and reflux in the of there was reflux or and A was more common in patients with typical symptoms and chest with those with an A different using the in patients were PPI found an reflux and symptoms in of the was to reflux in reflux in and reflux in by for symptoms in a or a systematic review that and and reflux in of GERD patients a found that reflux the of reflux in patients and is the main cause of symptoms PPI a on that the complaints are to reflux of any to the of the patient (including clinical presentation, presence of and/or of to to be the of reflux in GERD patients are that should be found that reflux on PPI may be the present approach can be to the of A review on this topic in the of to this the of may be based the clinical patients with a of GERD presentations without typical GERD may be as will GERD. with a

BACKGROUND: Loop diuretics are an essential component of therapy for patients with acute decompensated heart failure, but there are few prospective data to guide their use. METHODS: In a prospective, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned 308 patients with acute decompensated heart failure to receive furosemide administered intravenously by means of either a bolus every 12 hours or continuous infusion and at either a low dose (equivalent to the patient's previous oral dose) or a high dose (2.5 times the previous oral dose). The protocol allowed specified dose adjustments after 48 hours. The coprimary end points were patients' global assessment of symptoms, quantified as the area under the curve (AUC) of the score on a visual-analogue scale over the course of 72 hours, and the change in the serum creatinine level from baseline to 72 hours. RESULTS: In the comparison of bolus with continuous infusion, there was no significant difference in patients' global assessment of symptoms (mean AUC, 4236±1440 and 4373±1404, respectively; P=0.47) or in the mean change in the creatinine level (0.05±0.3 mg per deciliter [4.4±26.5 μmol per liter] and 0.07±0.3 mg per deciliter [6.2±26.5 μmol per liter], respectively; P=0.45). In the comparison of the high-dose strategy with the low-dose strategy, there was a nonsignificant trend toward greater improvement in patients' global assessment of symptoms in the high-dose group (mean AUC, 4430±1401 vs. 4171±1436; P=0.06). There was no significant difference between these groups in the mean change in the creatinine level (0.08±0.3 mg per deciliter [7.1±26.5 μmol per liter] with the high-dose strategy and 0.04±0.3 mg per deciliter [3.5±26.5 μmol per liter] with the low-dose strategy, P=0.21). The high-dose strategy was associated with greater diuresis and more favorable outcomes in some secondary measures but also with transient worsening of renal function. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute decompensated heart failure, there were no significant differences in patients' global assessment of symptoms or in the change in renal function when diuretic therapy was administered by bolus as compared with continuous infusion or at a high dose as compared with a low dose. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00577135.).

BACKGROUND: Since the patient's skin is a major source of pathogens that cause surgical-site infection, optimization of preoperative skin antisepsis may decrease postoperative infections. We hypothesized that preoperative skin cleansing with chlorhexidine-alcohol is more protective against infection than is povidone-iodine. METHODS: We randomly assigned adults undergoing clean-contaminated surgery in six hospitals to preoperative skin preparation with either chlorhexidine-alcohol scrub or povidone-iodine scrub and paint. The primary outcome was any surgical-site infection within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included individual types of surgical-site infections. RESULTS: A total of 849 subjects (409 in the chlorhexidine-alcohol group and 440 in the povidone-iodine group) qualified for the intention-to-treat analysis. The overall rate of surgical-site infection was significantly lower in the chlorhexidine-alcohol group than in the povidone-iodine group (9.5% vs. 16.1%; P=0.004; relative risk, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.85). Chlorhexidine-alcohol was significantly more protective than povidone-iodine against both superficial incisional infections (4.2% vs. 8.6%, P=0.008) and deep incisional infections (1% vs. 3%, P=0.05) but not against organ-space infections (4.4% vs. 4.5%). Similar results were observed in the per-protocol analysis of the 813 patients who remained in the study during the 30-day follow-up period. Adverse events were similar in the two study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative cleansing of the patient's skin with chlorhexidine-alcohol is superior to cleansing with povidone-iodine for preventing surgical-site infection after clean-contaminated surgery. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00290290.)

This 2022 European Atherosclerosis Society lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] consensus statement updates evidence for the role of Lp(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis, provides clinical guidance for testing and treating elevated Lp(a) levels, and considers its inclusion in global risk estimation. Epidemiologic and genetic studies involving hundreds of thousands of individuals strongly support a causal and continuous association between Lp(a) concentration and cardiovascular outcomes in different ethnicities; elevated Lp(a) is a risk factor even at very low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. High Lp(a) is associated with both microcalcification and macrocalcification of the aortic valve. Current findings do not support Lp(a) as a risk factor for venous thrombotic events and impaired fibrinolysis. Very low Lp(a) levels may associate with increased risk of diabetes mellitus meriting further study. Lp(a) has pro-inflammatory and pro-atherosclerotic properties, which may partly relate to the oxidized phospholipids carried by Lp(a). This panel recommends testing Lp(a) concentration at least once in adults; cascade testing has potential value in familial hypercholesterolaemia, or with family or personal history of (very) high Lp(a) or premature ASCVD. Without specific Lp(a)-lowering therapies, early intensive risk factor management is recommended, targeted according to global cardiovascular risk and Lp(a) level. Lipoprotein apheresis is an option for very high Lp(a) with progressive cardiovascular disease despite optimal management of risk factors. In conclusion, this statement reinforces evidence for Lp(a) as a causal risk factor for cardiovascular outcomes. Trials of specific Lp(a)-lowering treatments are critical to confirm clinical benefit for cardiovascular disease and aortic valve stenosis.

The major barrier to research and development of effective interventions for human noroviruses (HuNoVs) has been the lack of a robust and reproducible in vitro cultivation system. HuNoVs are the leading cause of gastroenteritis worldwide. We report the successful cultivation of multiple HuNoV strains in enterocytes in stem cell-derived, nontransformed human intestinal enteroid monolayer cultures. Bile, a critical factor of the intestinal milieu, is required for strain-dependent HuNoV replication. Lack of appropriate histoblood group antigen expression in intestinal cells restricts virus replication, and infectivity is abrogated by inactivation (e.g., irradiation, heating) and serum neutralization. This culture system recapitulates the human intestinal epithelium, permits human host-pathogen studies of previously noncultivatable pathogens, and allows the assessment of methods to prevent and treat HuNoV infections.

Free radicals derived from oxygen, nitrogen and sulphur molecules in the biological system are highly active to react with other molecules due to their unpaired electrons. These radicals are important part of groups of molecules called reactive oxygen/nitrogen species (ROS/RNS), which are produced during cellular metabolism and functional activities and have important roles in cell signalling, apoptosis, gene expression and ion transportation. However, excessive ROS attack bases in nucleic acids, amino acid side chains in proteins and double bonds in unsaturated fatty acids, and cause oxidative stress, which can damage DNA, RNA, proteins and lipids resulting in an increased risk for cardiovascular disease, cancer, autism and other diseases. Intracellular antioxidant enzymes and intake of dietary antioxidants may help to maintain an adequate antioxidant status in the body. In the past decades, new molecular techniques, cell cultures and animal models have been established to study the effects and mechanisms of antioxidants on ROS. The chemical and molecular approaches have been used to study the mechanism and kinetics of antioxidants and to identify new potent antioxidants. Antioxidants can decrease the oxidative damage directly via reacting with free radicals or indirectly by inhibiting the activity or expression of free radical generating enzymes or enhancing the activity or expression of intracellular antioxidant enzymes. The new chemical and cell-free biological system has been applied in dissecting the molecular action of antioxidants. This review focuses on the research approaches that have been used to study oxidative stress and antioxidants in lipid peroxidation, DNA damage, protein modification as well as enzyme activity, with emphasis on the chemical and cell-free biological system.

The 5-year survival rate in esophageal cancer, although poor, has improved over the past decade. This review discusses the epidemiologic aspects, pathogenesis, prevention, and therapy of esophageal adenocarcinoma and squamous-cell carcinoma, focusing on recent advances.

BACKGROUND: The association of body mass index and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), including its complications (esophagitis, Barrett esophagus, and esophageal adenocarcinoma), is unclear. PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the magnitude and determinants of an association between obesity and GERD symptoms, erosive esophagitis, Barrett esophagus, and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and of the gastric cardia. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE search between 1966 and October 2004 for published full studies. STUDY SELECTION: Studies that provided risk estimates and met criteria on defining exposure and reporting outcomes and sample size. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently performed standardized search and data abstraction. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios for individual outcomes were obtained or calculated for each study and were pooled by using a random-effects model. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nine studies examined the association of body mass index (BMI) with GERD symptoms. Six of these studies found statistically significant associations. Six of 7 studies found significant associations of BMI with erosive esophagitis, 6 of 7 found significant associations with esophageal adenocarcinoma, and 4 of 6 found significant associations with gastric cardia adenocarcinoma. In data from 8 studies, there was a trend toward a dose-response relationship with an increase in the pooled adjusted odds ratios for GERD symptoms of 1.43 (95% CI, 1.158 to 1.774) for BMI of 25 kg/m2 to 30 kg/m2 and 1.94 (CI, 1.468 to 2.566) for BMI greater than 30 kg/m2. Similarly, the pooled adjusted odds ratios for esophageal adenocarcinoma for BMI of 25 kg/m2 to 30 kg/m2 and BMI greater than 30 kg/m2 were 1.52 (CI, 1.147 to 2.009) and 2.78 (CI, 1.850 to 4.164), respectively. LIMITATIONS: Heterogeneity in the findings was present, although it was mostly in the magnitude of statistically significant positive associations. No studies in this review examined the association between Barrett esophagus and obesity. CONCLUSION: Obesity is associated with a statistically significant increase in the risk for GERD symptoms, erosive esophagitis, and esophageal adenocarcinoma. The risk for these disorders seems to progressively increase with increasing weight.

Perineural invasion (PNI) is the process of neoplastic invasion of nerves and is an under-recognized route of metastatic spread. It is emerging as an important pathologic feature of many malignancies, including those of the pancreas, colon and rectum, prostate, head and neck, biliary tract, and stomach. For many of these malignancies, PNI is a marker of poor outcome and a harbinger of decreased survival. PNI is a distinct pathologic entity that can be observed in the absence of lymphatic or vascular invasion. It can be a source of distant tumor spread well beyond the extent of any local invasion; and, for some tumors, PNI may be the sole route of metastatic spread. Despite increasing recognition of this metastatic process, there has been little progress in the understanding of molecular mechanisms behind PNI and, to date, no targeted treatment modalities aimed at this pathologic entity. The objectives of this review were to lay out a clear definition of PNI to highlight its significance in those malignancies in which it has been studied best. The authors also summarized current theories on the molecular mediators and pathogenesis of PNI and introduced current research models that are leading to advancements in the understanding of this metastatic process.

OBJECTIVE: Ketamine, a glutamate N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist, has shown rapid antidepressant effects, but small study groups and inadequate control conditions in prior studies have precluded a definitive conclusion. The authors evaluated the rapid antidepressant efficacy of ketamine in a large group of patients with treatment-resistant major depression. METHOD: This was a two-site, parallel-arm, randomized controlled trial of a single infusion of ketamine compared to an active placebo control condition, the anesthetic midazolam. Patients with treatment-resistant major depression experiencing a major depressive episode were randomly assigned under double-blind conditions to receive a single intravenous infusion of ketamine or midazolam in a 2:1 ratio (N=73). The primary outcome was change in depression severity 24 hours after drug administration, as assessed by the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). RESULTS: The ketamine group had greater improvement in the MADRS score than the midazolam group 24 hours after treatment. After adjustment for baseline scores and site, the MADRS score was lower in the ketamine group than in the midazolam group by 7.95 points (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.20 to 12.71). The likelihood of response at 24 hours was greater with ketamine than with midazolam (odds ratio, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.21 to 4.14), with response rates of 64% and 28%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine demonstrated rapid antidepressant effects in an optimized study design, further supporting NMDA receptor modulation as a novel mechanism for accelerated improvement in severe and chronic forms of depression. More information on response durability and safety is required before implementation in clinical practice.