BackgroundCandida esophagitis (CE) is a condition typically diagnosed in patients who are immunocompromised. Risk factors leading to the development of CE in immunocompetent patients have not been entirely elucidated. This study set out to identify risk factors associated with the development of CE in immunocompetent patients.MethodsThis study was a single-center retrospective chart review. Patients diagnosed with CE confirmed by endoscopic biopsy or brushings at our hospital between 2007 and 2017 were reviewed. The medical histories, endoscopy reports and pathology results were noted. Abdominal pain, heartburn, dysphagia and odynophagia were the common indications for endoscopy. A total of 241 patients were identified as having been diagnosed with CE by endoscopic brushing or biopsy. Of these patients, 161 were excluded due to the presence of immunocompromising and 80 patients were included who had no underlying immunocompromising conditions.ResultsEighty patients with CE satisfied the inclusion criteria. The mean age of patients at the time of diagnosis was 39.8 years old (95% CI: 34.9 - 44.7). The incidences in men and women were similar in this study (49% women and 51% men). Of these patients, 56 (70%) (95% CI: 59-80%; P < 0.005) were taking proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Fifteen patients (19%) had a previous upper endoscopy with evidence of reflux esophagitis, and they were all treated with PPIs and subsequently found to have CE on repeat upper endoscopy with a mean of 21.6 months of PPI treatment. There were 16 (20%) patients without any attributable risk factor and were completely healthy.ConclusionsCE is an opportunistic infection typically seen in immunocompromised. We report incidence of CE in immunocompetent patients. In our cohort of immunocompetent patients, PPI use was the most common risk factor associated with the development of CE. This could be related to hypochlorhydria resulting from PPI use. However, the cause remains unclear in some patients.
Background:Cigarette smoking is the largest preventable risk factor for morbidity and mortality in developed countries where at least one in four adults smoke cigarettes. Healthcare providers who smoke are less likely to advise patients to quit smoking. The aim of this study is to find out the frequency of tobacco smoking among medical professionals in tertiary care hospitals of Karachi, and to identify the common factors responsible for the continuation of smoking among healthcare providers.Methods:This descriptive cross-sectional study was carried out at public and private tertiary Care Hospitals/Institutes at Karachi. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from 180 subjects. An informed consent was obtained from all the subjects. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 16.0.Results:Prevalence of smoking was 29%. High prevalence of smoking was among male doctors as compared to female doctors. Sixty-eight per cent of smokers started smoking between 20 to 30 years of age. Age less than 35 years, male and public sectors hospitals were more likely OR 1.23, CI (0.98-2.41), 6.40 CI (4.48-10.52) and 2.61 CI (2.20-3.78) respectively.Conclusions:The Result of the study suggests that while healthcare smoking habits appear to be high, they are not uniformly low when compared from an international perspective. Health promotion programs focused on self-efficacy may be an effective tool for reducing the initiation, frequency, and amount of cigarette smoking among healthcare providers.
BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is widely recognized as a disease that affects the respiratory system, although it can also present with significant extrapulmonary symptoms. Very few studies have suggested an increased risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. This study aimed to elucidate the incidence, etiology, risk factors, and outcomes of clinically significant GI bleeding requiring endoscopic intervention in patients with COVID-19. MethodsThis is a case-control (1:2) retrospective analysis of all hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 infection admitted between March 1, 2020, and January 5, 2021, in which we compared patients with upper and lower GI bleeds to those without. Cases are defined as patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who had a GI bleed requiring intervention while controls are defined as patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who did not have a GI bleed. Of 1002 patients admitted to the Albany Medical Center with COVID-19 infection, there were 76 confirmed cases of GI bleeding. These patients were compared to a control group composed of randomly selected patients with COVID-19 infection who were admitted to Albany Medical Center over the same time period. We assessed patients for in-hospital mortality, ventilator-free days on day 28, ICU-free days on day 28, and hospital-free days on day 28. Additional information collected included demographic information, comorbid conditions, COVID-19 treatments received, endoscopy findings, endoscopic treatment received, and if the patients required a packed red blood cell transfusion. ResultsOut of 1007 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 76 (8%) had a GI bleed requiring endoscopic intervention. Peptic ulcer disease in the stomach or duodenum was the most common finding. The use of steroids, antiplatelet agents, and anticoagulation was not associated with an increased risk of GI bleed in COVID-19 patients. The GI bleed group required ICU care in 37% (28/76) compared with 21% (32/152) in the control group, which was statistically significant (p=0.012; chi-square test). Length of hospital stay was longer in the GI bleed group (median 16 days IQR: 8 to 29 versus 7 days, IQR:4 to 16; p<0.001, Mann Whitney test). ConclusionLength of hospital stay and ICU level of care was higher in the GI bleed group of patients with COVID-19. ICU level of care was noted to be associated with an increased risk of GI bleeding. A GI bleed in COVID-19 patients could be from the virus's direct effect on the gut mucosa or stress-induced bleeding like any other severely sick ICU patient; however, this needs to be explored in future studies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.