Liver Fibrosis in HIV Patients Receiving a Modern cART: Which Factors Play a Role?

Liver-related death in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals is about 10 times higher compared with the general population, and the prevalence of significant liver fibrosis in those with HIV approaches 15%. The present study aimed to assess risk factors for development of hepatic fibrosis in HIV patients receiving a modern combination anti-retroviral therapy (cART).This cross-sectional prospective study included 432 HIV patients, of which 68 (16%) patients were anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) positive and 23 (5%) were HBsAg positive.Health trajectory including clinical characteristics and liver fibrosis stage assessed by transient elastography were collected at inclusion. Liver stiffness values >7.1 kPa were considered as significant fibrosis, while values >12.5 kPa were defined as severe fibrosis. Logistic regression and Cox regression uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to identify independent factors associated with liver fibrosis.Significant liver fibrosis was detected in 10% of HIV mono-infected, in 37% of HCV co-infected patients, and in 18% of hepatitis B virus co-infected patients. The presence of diabetes mellitus (odds ratio [OR] = 4.6) and FIB4 score (OR = 2.4) were independently associated with presence of significant fibrosis in the whole cohort. Similarly, diabetes mellitus (OR = 5.4), adiposity (OR = 4.6), and the FIB4 score (OR = 3.3) were independently associated with significant fibrosis in HIV mono-infected patients. Importantly, cumulative cART duration protected, whereas persistent HIV viral replication promoted the development of significant liver fibrosis along the duration of HIV infection.Our findings strongly indicate that besides known risk factors like metabolic disorders, HIV may also have a direct effect on fibrogenesis. Successful cART leading to complete suppression of HIV replication might protect from development of liver fibrosis.     

Esophageal Calibration with Soft Orogasrtric Tube During Laparoscopic Nissen Fundoplication may Reduce Postoperative Transient Dysphagia

Gastroesophageal reflux is the most common benign disorder of the esophagus and laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication has become the standard surgical treatment for its treatment. In our area, where the use of bougie calibration is debatable, postoperative dysphagia is encountered often after this surgery although it is usually not permanent. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of using a soft silicone tube 39 F in diameter for esophageal calibration during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication on the incidence of postoperative dysphagia. We divided cases scheduled to undergo laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication between January 2009 and November 2010 into two groups, each consisting 25 patients. Esophageal calibration with a 39 F silicone orogastric tube was used for the first group while there was no operative calibration in the second group. The surgical duration was recorded; the presence and severity of the postoperative dysphagia was calculated by using a dysphagia severity scoring system during the 1-year postoperative follow-up. The dysphagia severity scores were significantly lower in group 1 than group 2 on the postoperative second day and at the end of the first week and first month. We did not find a significant difference at the end of the 6-month and first year. There was also no significant difference regarding surgery duration. The use of a soft orogastric tube 39 F in diameter for esophagus calibration during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication has significantly decreased the incidence of postoperative transient dysphagia without affecting the duration of surgery. Although dysphagia gradually resolves in the majority of patients, a safe and easy calibration method for its prevention is worth developing, and we believe that the use of our method in larger series could be beneficial.     

Current therapeutical strategies for allergic rhinitis

Introduction: Allergic rhinitis is a common condition with increasing prevalence and is associated with several comorbid disorders such as bronchial asthma and atopic dermatitis. If allergen avoidance is not possible, allergen-specific immunotherapy is the only causal treatment option.

Areas covered: This review focuses on current treatments and the future outlook for allergic rhinitis. Pharmacotherapy includes mast cell stabilizers, antihistamines, glucocorticosteroids (GCSs), leukotriene receptor antagonists, and nasal decongestants. Nasal GCSs are currently regarded as the most effective treatment and are considered first-line therapy together with non-sedating antihistamines. The new formulation MP29-02 combines the nasal GCS fluticasone propionate with azelastine in one single spray and has achieved greater improvements than those under monotherapy with modern GCSs or antihistamines. Furthermore, this review discusses allergen immunotherapy alone and in combination with modern monoclonal antibodies.

Expert opinion: Despite the variety of medications for allergic rhinitis, ranging from general symptomatic agents like GCSs or decongestants, to more specific ones like histamine receptor or leukotriene blockers, to causal therapy like immunotherapy, many patients still experience treatment failures or unsatisfactory results. The ultimate goal may be to endotype every downstream pathway separately in order to offer patients individualized, targeted therapy with specific antibodies against the respective pathway.