Long-term diabetic response to gastric bypass

Background

As obesity and type II diabetes continue to rise, bariatric surgery offers a solution, but few long-term studies are available. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of diabetic patients after gastric bypass.

Materials and methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of all diabetic patients undergoing gastric bypass at our institution, from 1998 to 2012. Patients were compared by postoperative diabetic response to treatment (i.e., response = off oral medication/insulin versus refractory = on oral medication/insulin) and followed at 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-y intervals. Continuous data were analyzed using Student t-test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Multivariable, Cox proportional hazard regression model was performed to compute diabetic cure ratios and 95% confidence intervals.

Results

A total of 2454 bariatric surgeries were performed at our institution during the time period. A total of 707 diabetic patients were selected by Current Procedural Terminology codes for gastric bypass. Mean follow-up was 2.1 y. Incidence of diabetic response was 56% (1 y), 58% (3 y), 60% (5 y), and 44% (10 y). Postoperatively, responsive patients experienced greater percentage of total body weight loss (1 y [P < 0.0001], 3 y [P = 0.0087], and 5 y [P = 0.013]), and less hemoglobin A1c levels (1 y [P = 0.035] and 3 y [P = 0.040]) at follow-up than refractory patients. Multivariable analysis revealed a significant, independent inverse trend in incidence of diabetic cure as both age and body mass index decreased (P_trend = 0.0019 and <0.0001, respectively). In addition, degenerative joint disease was independently associated with responsive diabetes (cure ratio = 1.6 [95% confidence interval = 1.1–2.2]).

Conclusions

At follow-up, both groups in our study experienced substantial weight loss; however, a greater loss was observed among the response group. Further research is needed to evaluate methods for optimizing patient care preoperatively and improving patient follow-up.     

Survey of patient and physician influences and decision-making regarding CT utilization for minor head injury

Objective

Assess factors that influence both the patient and the physician in the setting of minor head injury in adults and the decision-making process around CT utilization.

Methods

This is a convenience sample survey study of adult minor head injury patients (GCS 15) and their physicians regarding factors influencing the decision to use CT to evaluate for intra-cranial haemorrhage. Once a head CT was ordered and before the results were known, both the patient and physician were given a one-page survey asking questions about their concern for injury and rationale for CT use. CT results and surveys were then recorded in a centralized database and analyzed.

Results

584 subjects were enrolled over the 27-month study period. The rate of any intra-cranial haemorrhage was 3.3%. Both the physicians (6% pre-test estimate) and the patients (22% pre-test estimate) over-estimated risk for haemorrhage. Clinical decision rules were not met in 46% of cases where CT was used. Physicians listed an average of 5 factors from a list of 9 that influenced their decision to order CT. Patients listed an average of 1.7 factors influencing their decision to present to the Emergency Department for evaluation. Many patients felt cost (45%) and low risk stratification (34%) should weigh heavily in the decision to use CT. If asked to limit CT utilization, physicians were able to identify a group with less than 2% risk of injury.

Conclusions

Patients with low risk of intra-cranial injury continue to be evaluated by CT. Physician decision-making around the use of CT to evaluate minor head injury is multi-factorial. Shared decision-making between the patient and the physician in a low risk minor head injury encounter shows promise as a method to reduce CT utilization in this low risk cohort.     

Consensus Paper: Language and the Cerebellum: an Ongoing Enigma

In less than three decades, the concept “cerebellar neurocognition” has evolved from a mere afterthought to an entirely new and multifaceted area of neuroscientific research. A close interplay between three main strands of contemporary neuroscience induced a substantial modification of the traditional view of the cerebellum as a mere coordinator of autonomic and somatic motor functions. Indeed, the wealth of current evidence derived from detailed neuroanatomical investigations, functional neuroimaging studies with healthy subjects and patients and in-depth neuropsychological assessment of patients with cerebellar disorders shows that the cerebellum has a cardinal role to play in affective regulation, cognitive processing, and linguistic function. Although considerable progress has been made in models of cerebellar function, controversy remains regarding the exact role of the “linguistic cerebellum” in a broad variety of nonmotor language processes. This consensus paper brings together a range of different viewpoints and opinions regarding the contribution of the cerebellum to language function. Recent developments and insights in the nonmotor modulatory role of the cerebellum in language and some related disorders will be discussed. The role of the cerebellum in speech and language perception, in motor speech planning including apraxia of speech, in verbal working memory, in phonological and semantic verbal fluency, in syntax processing, in the dynamics of language production, in reading and in writing will be addressed. In addition, the functional topography of the linguistic cerebellum and the contribution of the deep nuclei to linguistic function will be briefly discussed. As such, a framework for debate and discussion will be offered in this consensus paper.