Risk Factors and Predictive Model of Diarrhea Among Patients with Severe Stroke

Gut dysbiosis mediates the association between antibiotic exposure and chronic disease

Antibiotics are safe, effective drugs and continue to save millions of lives and prevent long-term illness worldwide. A large body of epidemiological, interventional and experimental evidence shows that exposure to antibiotics has long-term negative effects on human health. We reviewed the literature data on the links between antibiotic exposure, gut dysbiosis, and chronic disease (notably with regard to the "developmental origins of health and disease" ("DOHaD") approach). Molecular biology studies show that the systemic administration of antibiotic to infants has a rapid onset but also often a long-lasting impact on the microbial composition of the gut. Along with other environmental factors (e.g., an unhealthy "Western" diet and sedentary behavior), antibiotics induce gut dysbiosis, which can be defined as the disruption of a previously stable, functionally complete microbiota. Gut dysbiosis many harmful long-term effects on health. Associations between early-life exposure to antibiotics have been reported for chronic diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease, celiac disease, some cancers, metabolic diseases (obesity and type 2 diabetes), allergic diseases, autoimmune disorders, atherosclerosis, arthritis, and neurodevelopmental, neurodegenerative and other neurological diseases. In mechanistic terms, gut dysbiosis influences chronic disease through direct effects on mucosal immune and inflammatory pathways, plus a wide array of direct or indirect effects of short-chain fatty acids, the enteric nervous system, peristaltic motility, the production of hormones and neurotransmitters, and the loss of intestinal barrier integrity (notably with leakage of the pro-inflammatory endotoxin lipopolysaccharide into the circulation). To mitigate dysbiosis, the administration of probiotics in patients with chronic disease is often (but not always) associated with positive effects on clinical markers (e.g., disease scores) and biomarkers of inflammation and immune activation. Meta-analyses are complicated by differences in probiotic composition, dose level, and treatment duration, and large, randomized, controlled clinical trials are lacking in many disease areas. In view of the critical importance of deciding whether or not to prescribe antibiotics (especially to children), we suggest that the DOHaD concept can be logically extended to "gastrointestinal origins of health and disease" ("GOHaD") or even "microbiotic origins of health and disease" ("MOHaD").

Can the Evidence-Based Use of Probiotics (Notably Saccharomyces boulardii CNCM I-745 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG) Mitigate the Clinical Effects of Antibiotic-Associated Dysbiosis?

Dysbiosis corresponds to the disruption of a formerly stable, functionally complete microbiota. In the gut, this imbalance can lead to adverse health outcomes in both the short and long terms, with a potential increase in the lifetime risks of various noncommunicable diseases and disorders such as atopy (like asthma), inflammatory bowel disease, neurological disorders, and even behavioural and psychological disorders. Although antibiotics are highly effective in reducing morbidity and mortality in infectious diseases, antibiotic-associated diarrhoea is a common, non-negligible clinical sign of gut dysbiosis (and the only visible one). Re-establishment of a normal (functional) gut microbiota is promoted by completion of the clinically indicated course of antibiotics, the removal of any other perturbing external factors, the passage of time (i.e. recovery through the microbiota's natural resilience), appropriate nutritional support, and-in selected cases-the addition of probiotics. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials have confirmed the strain-specific efficacy of some probiotics (notably the yeast Saccharomyces boulardii CNCM I-745 and the bacterium Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG) in the treatment and/or prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in children and in adults. Unusually for a probiotic, S. boulardii is a eukaryote and is not therefore directly affected by antibiotics-making it suitable for administration in cases of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea. A robust body of evidence from clinical trials and meta-analyses shows that the timely administration of an adequately dosed probiotic (upon initiation of antibiotic treatment or within 48 h) can help to prevent or resolve the consequences of antibiotic-associated dysbiosis (such as diarrhoea) and promote the resilience of the gut microbiota and a return to the pre-antibiotic state. A focus on the prescription of evidence-based, adequately dosed probiotics should help to limit unjustified and potentially ineffective self-medication.

COVID-19 and Gut Injury

COVID-19 induced by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is currently a pandemic and it has led to more than 620 million patients with 6.56 million deaths globally. Males are more susceptible to COVID-19 infection and associated with a higher chance to develop severe COVID-19 than females. Aged people are at a high risk of COVID-19 infection, while young children have also increased cases. COVID-19 patients typically develop respiratory system pathologies, however symptoms in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract are also very common. Inflammatory cell recruitments and their secreted cytokines are found in the GI tract in COVID-19 patients. Microbiota changes are the key feature in COVID-19 patients with gut injury. Here, we review all current known mechanisms of COVID-19-induced gut injury, and the most acceptable one is that SARS-CoV-2 binds to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor on host cells in the GI tract. Interestingly, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an inflammatory disorder, but the patients with IBD do not have the increased risk to develop COVID-19. There is currently no cure for COVID-19, but anti-viruses and monoclonal antibodies reduce viral load and shorten the recovery time of the disease. We summarize current therapeutics that target symptoms in the GI tract, including probiotics, ACE2 inhibitors and nutrients. These are promising therapeutic options for COVID-19-induced gut injury.

Is intensive care unit mortality a valid survival outcome measure related to critical illness?

RATIONALE

Use of death as an outcome of intensive care unit (ICU) admission may be biased by differential discharge decisions.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the validity of ICU survival status as an outcome measure of all cause case-fatality.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of first admissions among adults to four ICUs in North Brisbane, Australia was assembled. Death in ICU (censored at discharge or 30 days) was compared with 30-day overall case-fatality.

RESULTS

The 30-day overall case-fatality was 8.1% (2436/29,939). One thousand six hundred and thirty-one deaths occurred within the ICU stay and 576 subsequent during hospital post-ICU discharge within 30-days; ICU and hospital case-fatality rates were 5.4% and 7.4%, respectively. An additional 229 patients died after hospital separation within 30 days of ICU admission of which 110 (48.0%) were transferred to another acute care hospital, 80 (34.9%) discharged home, and 39 (17.0%) transferred to an aged care/chronic care/rehabilitation facility. Patients who died after ICU discharge were older, had higher APACHE III scores, were more likely to be elective surgical patients, and were less likely to be out of state residents or managed in a tertiary referral hospital. Limiting determination of case-fatality to ICU information alone would correctly detect 95% (780/821) of all-cause mortality at day 3, 90% (1093/1213) at day 5, 75% (1524/2019) at day 15, 72% (1592/2244) at day 21, and 67% (1631/2436) at day 30 of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of ICU case-fatality significantly underestimates the true burden and biases assessment of determinants of critical illness-related mortality in our region.

Long-term survival outcomes of pineal region gliomas

Purpose

Surgical series of pineal region gliomas are rarely available. Whereas it is a general assumption that the extent of surgical resection correlates with survival outcomes of intracranial gliomas; the impact of the microsurgical resection on the long-term outcomes of pineal gliomas has been questioned. We present a surgical series of pineal region gliomas with focus on the survival outcome analysis.

Methods

17 histologically confirmed pineal region glioma patients classified as diffuse and non-diffuse gliomas were retrospectively analyzed. A detailed description of the series was followed by regression models to identify predictors of clinical outcomes. Uni- a multivariate survival analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of mortality.

Results

Although the number of treated patients was small, only WHO grade histopathology remained significant (p = 0.02) after multivariate survival analysis with extent of resection, age, tumor volume, and preoperative functional status. The extent of the surgical resection did not correlate with the disease survival rates of non-diffuse (p = 1), diffuse (p = 0.2), nor all gliomas (p = 0.6). 15 of 17 patients underwent gross total (nine patients) or subtotal resection. The preoperative functional status of the patients showed overall improvement on the immediate (p < 0.001) and long-term (p = 0.03) follow-up after 106 (3 – 324) months.

Conclusion

The extent of the surgical resection does not seem to significantly impact on the survival outcomes of pineal region gliomas. Thus, genotype and molecular features may essentially affect the outcome. Further research on the field is required.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11060-020-03571-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.