Intensive control of hyperglycemia in patients hospitalized in non-critical care settings may reduce the risk of infection. The quality of evidence is low and mainly driven by studies in surgical settings.

No abstract

Awareness of and communication about issues related to radiation dose are beneficial for patients, clinicians, and radiology departments. Initiating and facilitating discussions of the net benefit of CT by enlisting comparisons to more familiar activities, or by conveying that the anticipated radiation dose to an exam is similar to or much less than annual background levels help resolve the concerns of many patients and providers. While radiation risk estimates at the low doses associated with CT contain considerable uncertainty, we choose to err on the side of safety by assuming a small risk exists, even though the risk at these dose levels may be zero. Thus, radiologists should individualize CT scans according to patient size and diagnostic task to ensure that maximum benefit and minimum risk is achieved. However, because the magnitude of net benefit is driven by the potential benefit of a positive exam, radiation dose should not be reduced if doing so may compromise making an accurate diagnosis. The benefits and risks of CT are also highly individualized, and require consideration of many factors by patients, clinicians, and radiologists. Radiologists can assist clinicians and patients with understanding many of these factors, including test performance, potential patient benefit, and estimates of potential risk.

Background and Aims Increasingly, persons start a gluten-free diet (GFD) without a clear celiac disease (CD) diagnosis. Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genotyping is useful in ruling out CD in patients with equivocal results of serologic testing or small-bowel biopsy (SBB), but its utility and the clinical features of patients on self-treated GFD (ST-GFD) are largely unknown. Methods Retrospective study of single tertiary care center cohort compared 137 patients on ST-GFD and 443 patients with well-defined CD. We compared HLA genotype, symptoms, serologic and SBB results, and response to GFD between the 2 groups. Analysis used univariate logistic regression modeling, adjusted for age and sex. Results Patients with ST-GFD presented more often with diarrhea (P<.001), abdominal distention (P<.001), flatulence (P=.002), cramping (P=.02), itchy skin (P=.02), oral inflammation (P=.04), and constipation (P=.01) and less often with anemia (P<.001) or malaise (P=.02) than CD patients. In addition, 41% did not carry DQ2.5 and DQ8 vs 6% of CD patients (P<.001). Only 2% of ST-GFD patients had SBB clearly consistent with CD. Family history of CD showed no difference between groups (P=.77). Although CD patients had a statistically higher rate of GFD benefit, both groups had a high responsiveness rate (98% vs 94%; P=.03). Conclusions HLA genotyping is useful in evaluating patients on a ST-GFD. Although confirmed CD is rare in self-treated patients, most still report benefit from GFD regardless of DQ2 and DQ8 status. Nonceliac gluten sensitivity may play a role.

No abstract