User login
A ‘game changer’ for pediatric HIV
In memory of Anne Marie Regan, CPNP, senior research coordinator, Pediatric HIV Program, Boston City Hospital
Our first child with perinatal HIV presented in 1985 at age 4 weeks with failure to thrive, vomiting, diarrhea, and thrush. Over the next several years, the number of HIV-infected infants grew exponentially, and by 1991, we were caring for more than 50 infants and children at Boston City Hospital.
Antiretrovirals were marginally effective for HIV-infected infants and children at this time. Subsequently, we embarked on a national effort to prevent vertical transmission. We participated first in the study of pharmacokinetics of zidovudine (AZT) in newborns. We enrolled patients in ACTG 076 to test the hypothesis that treatment with AZT during pregnancy and labor, and in the infant, would reduce the risk of vertical transmission. Fifty U.S. and nine French sites enrolled 473 women between April 1991 and December 20, 1993. The results were spectacular; 8 of 100 infants in the AZT treatment group, compared with 25 out of 100 infants in the control group, developed HIV. By 1995, HIV testing was offered to all women at Boston Medical Center (formerly Boston City Hospital), and the promise of prevention of vertical transmission was reaching fruition. Between 1996 and 2016, approximately 500 HIV-infected women delivered at Boston Medical Center with vertical transmission identified in only 6 (1.2%) infants; without ACTG 076, we would have expected 125! In 2013, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that 70% of pregnant HIV-infected women received the complete 076 regimen, and 93% of mothers or infants received some part of the regimen. In 1992, 900 HIV-infected infants were diagnosed in the United States, and as many as 2,000 newborns were estimated to have been born infected with HIV; in 2015, 86 vertical transmissions were identified. This was, and remains, a remarkable accomplishment.
Dr. Pelton is chief of pediatric infectious diseases and coordinator of the maternal-child HIV program at Boston Medical Center. Ms. Moloney is a certified pediatric nurse practitioner in the division of pediatric infectious diseases. Dr. Pelton said he had no relevant financial disclosures, and Ms. Moloney is a speaker (on vaccines) for Sanofi Pasteur. Email them at pdnews@frontlinemedcom.com.
In memory of Anne Marie Regan, CPNP, senior research coordinator, Pediatric HIV Program, Boston City Hospital
Our first child with perinatal HIV presented in 1985 at age 4 weeks with failure to thrive, vomiting, diarrhea, and thrush. Over the next several years, the number of HIV-infected infants grew exponentially, and by 1991, we were caring for more than 50 infants and children at Boston City Hospital.
Antiretrovirals were marginally effective for HIV-infected infants and children at this time. Subsequently, we embarked on a national effort to prevent vertical transmission. We participated first in the study of pharmacokinetics of zidovudine (AZT) in newborns. We enrolled patients in ACTG 076 to test the hypothesis that treatment with AZT during pregnancy and labor, and in the infant, would reduce the risk of vertical transmission. Fifty U.S. and nine French sites enrolled 473 women between April 1991 and December 20, 1993. The results were spectacular; 8 of 100 infants in the AZT treatment group, compared with 25 out of 100 infants in the control group, developed HIV. By 1995, HIV testing was offered to all women at Boston Medical Center (formerly Boston City Hospital), and the promise of prevention of vertical transmission was reaching fruition. Between 1996 and 2016, approximately 500 HIV-infected women delivered at Boston Medical Center with vertical transmission identified in only 6 (1.2%) infants; without ACTG 076, we would have expected 125! In 2013, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that 70% of pregnant HIV-infected women received the complete 076 regimen, and 93% of mothers or infants received some part of the regimen. In 1992, 900 HIV-infected infants were diagnosed in the United States, and as many as 2,000 newborns were estimated to have been born infected with HIV; in 2015, 86 vertical transmissions were identified. This was, and remains, a remarkable accomplishment.
Dr. Pelton is chief of pediatric infectious diseases and coordinator of the maternal-child HIV program at Boston Medical Center. Ms. Moloney is a certified pediatric nurse practitioner in the division of pediatric infectious diseases. Dr. Pelton said he had no relevant financial disclosures, and Ms. Moloney is a speaker (on vaccines) for Sanofi Pasteur. Email them at pdnews@frontlinemedcom.com.
In memory of Anne Marie Regan, CPNP, senior research coordinator, Pediatric HIV Program, Boston City Hospital
Our first child with perinatal HIV presented in 1985 at age 4 weeks with failure to thrive, vomiting, diarrhea, and thrush. Over the next several years, the number of HIV-infected infants grew exponentially, and by 1991, we were caring for more than 50 infants and children at Boston City Hospital.
Antiretrovirals were marginally effective for HIV-infected infants and children at this time. Subsequently, we embarked on a national effort to prevent vertical transmission. We participated first in the study of pharmacokinetics of zidovudine (AZT) in newborns. We enrolled patients in ACTG 076 to test the hypothesis that treatment with AZT during pregnancy and labor, and in the infant, would reduce the risk of vertical transmission. Fifty U.S. and nine French sites enrolled 473 women between April 1991 and December 20, 1993. The results were spectacular; 8 of 100 infants in the AZT treatment group, compared with 25 out of 100 infants in the control group, developed HIV. By 1995, HIV testing was offered to all women at Boston Medical Center (formerly Boston City Hospital), and the promise of prevention of vertical transmission was reaching fruition. Between 1996 and 2016, approximately 500 HIV-infected women delivered at Boston Medical Center with vertical transmission identified in only 6 (1.2%) infants; without ACTG 076, we would have expected 125! In 2013, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that 70% of pregnant HIV-infected women received the complete 076 regimen, and 93% of mothers or infants received some part of the regimen. In 1992, 900 HIV-infected infants were diagnosed in the United States, and as many as 2,000 newborns were estimated to have been born infected with HIV; in 2015, 86 vertical transmissions were identified. This was, and remains, a remarkable accomplishment.
Dr. Pelton is chief of pediatric infectious diseases and coordinator of the maternal-child HIV program at Boston Medical Center. Ms. Moloney is a certified pediatric nurse practitioner in the division of pediatric infectious diseases. Dr. Pelton said he had no relevant financial disclosures, and Ms. Moloney is a speaker (on vaccines) for Sanofi Pasteur. Email them at pdnews@frontlinemedcom.com.
Dermatologists, rheumatologists differ in management of pediatric discoid lupus erythematosus
CHICAGO – With no consensus guidelines, rheumatologists and dermatologists have significant practice-based differences in their treatment of children with discoid lupus erythematosus, according to a survey of the two specialties.
The survey’s results from 57 pediatric dermatologists and 47 pediatric rheumatologists showed a lack of consensus between the two specialties in how to screen for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The two specialties also differed in identification of which features of discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) might predispose children to developing SLE, and in some therapy choices for DLE.
Although rare in children, DLE may develop into systemic lupus erythematosus in about 25%-30% of pediatric patients, according to Lisa Arkin, MD, who shared the survey results during a poster presentation at the World Congress of Pediatric Dermatology.
Dr. Arkin and her colleagues conducted a Web-based survey to examine differences in DLE treatment practice patterns between pediatric dermatologists and pediatric rheumatologists. They sent the survey to 292 members of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA), and to 200 members of the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance (PeDRA), and received responses from 44% of the rheumatologists and 56% of the dermatologists. Of those, 57 dermatologists and 47 rheumatologists met inclusion criteria for the study.
More than half of the respondents in each specialty had seen fewer than 10 patients with skin-limited DLE, and fewer than 10 patients with SLE and DLE, over the course of their careers, said Dr. Arkin, director of pediatric dermatology at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Consensus was defined by Dr. Arkin and her colleagues as greater than 70% agreement from both specialties, and 2-sided P values less than .05 showed practice differences between rheumatologists and dermatologists.
Clinicians reached a consensus that the presence of either arthritis or nephritis in a pediatric patient with DLE put the patient at high risk for SLE. Arthritis was identified as a high-risk feature by 41 of 57 dermatologists (72%) and 36 of 47 rheumatologists (77%), while nephritis was seen as a high-risk feature by 39 dermatologists (68%) and 37 rheumatologists (79%). However, said Dr. Arkin, “no other features from a list of 30 risk factors including demographics, clinical, or laboratory features achieved consensus.”
In deciding which laboratory studies to order to screen for SLE upon DLE diagnosis, 26 dermatologists (46%) and 38 rheumatologists (81%) choose a full screening panel, according to the survey results. That was a significant between-specialty difference (P less than .001). The full panel consisted of obtaining a complete blood count with differential, testing for renal and hepatic function, obtaining the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and doing urine studies. The panel also included testing for complements, autoantibodies including anti–double-stranded DNA, single-stranded A and B, ribonucleoprotein, anti-Smith, and antiphospholipid antibodies.
However, when individual laboratory studies were examined, several did achieve consensus for baseline screening. Those included the CBC with differential; urinalysis (but not urine protein creatinine), ESR (but not CRP); complement, renal, and hepatic function testing; and most autoantibody testing (but not antiphospholipid antibody testing). Where there were differences in likelihood to order a test, rheumatologists were more likely to order the test than dermatologists.
In deciding on initial treatment, “rheumatologists were more likely to always initiate hydroxychloroquine than dermatologists,” said Dr. Arkin. Of the rheumatologists, 49% always initiated hydroxychloroquine, compared with 14% of the dermatologists (P less than .001).
In contrast, “dermatologists were more likely to always initiate topical therapy than the rheumatologists,” said Dr. Arkin. Topical therapy was always started by 81% of the dermatologists and 33% of the rheumatologists (P less than .001).
Although the specialties differed in whether they always initiated a certain treatment, “hydroxychloroquine achieved consensus as first-line therapy,” Dr. Arkin noted, with 81% of dermatologists and 87% of rheumatologists choosing hydroxychloroquine when the survey asked for a first-line systemic therapy.
There was no consensus about which agents were best for add-on therapy. Of the dermatologists, 32% would sometimes use methotrexate, which was used by 21% of rheumatologists for refractory skin disease. Quinacrine was used as add-on therapy by 21% of dermatologists and 15% of rheumatologists. Rheumatologists were significantly more likely to add dapsone than dermatologists (28% vs. 5%, P = .002).
The survey points to the need to develop consensus guidelines in the treatment of pediatric DLE, said Dr. Arkin. “Knowledge gaps include risk factors for SLE, optimal screening, and therapy,” she explained. “Collection of robust longitudinal data will aid in developing pediatric consensus guidelines for DLE.”
Dr. Arkin had no conflicts of interest.
koakes@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @karioakes
CHICAGO – With no consensus guidelines, rheumatologists and dermatologists have significant practice-based differences in their treatment of children with discoid lupus erythematosus, according to a survey of the two specialties.
The survey’s results from 57 pediatric dermatologists and 47 pediatric rheumatologists showed a lack of consensus between the two specialties in how to screen for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The two specialties also differed in identification of which features of discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) might predispose children to developing SLE, and in some therapy choices for DLE.
Although rare in children, DLE may develop into systemic lupus erythematosus in about 25%-30% of pediatric patients, according to Lisa Arkin, MD, who shared the survey results during a poster presentation at the World Congress of Pediatric Dermatology.
Dr. Arkin and her colleagues conducted a Web-based survey to examine differences in DLE treatment practice patterns between pediatric dermatologists and pediatric rheumatologists. They sent the survey to 292 members of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA), and to 200 members of the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance (PeDRA), and received responses from 44% of the rheumatologists and 56% of the dermatologists. Of those, 57 dermatologists and 47 rheumatologists met inclusion criteria for the study.
More than half of the respondents in each specialty had seen fewer than 10 patients with skin-limited DLE, and fewer than 10 patients with SLE and DLE, over the course of their careers, said Dr. Arkin, director of pediatric dermatology at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Consensus was defined by Dr. Arkin and her colleagues as greater than 70% agreement from both specialties, and 2-sided P values less than .05 showed practice differences between rheumatologists and dermatologists.
Clinicians reached a consensus that the presence of either arthritis or nephritis in a pediatric patient with DLE put the patient at high risk for SLE. Arthritis was identified as a high-risk feature by 41 of 57 dermatologists (72%) and 36 of 47 rheumatologists (77%), while nephritis was seen as a high-risk feature by 39 dermatologists (68%) and 37 rheumatologists (79%). However, said Dr. Arkin, “no other features from a list of 30 risk factors including demographics, clinical, or laboratory features achieved consensus.”
In deciding which laboratory studies to order to screen for SLE upon DLE diagnosis, 26 dermatologists (46%) and 38 rheumatologists (81%) choose a full screening panel, according to the survey results. That was a significant between-specialty difference (P less than .001). The full panel consisted of obtaining a complete blood count with differential, testing for renal and hepatic function, obtaining the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and doing urine studies. The panel also included testing for complements, autoantibodies including anti–double-stranded DNA, single-stranded A and B, ribonucleoprotein, anti-Smith, and antiphospholipid antibodies.
However, when individual laboratory studies were examined, several did achieve consensus for baseline screening. Those included the CBC with differential; urinalysis (but not urine protein creatinine), ESR (but not CRP); complement, renal, and hepatic function testing; and most autoantibody testing (but not antiphospholipid antibody testing). Where there were differences in likelihood to order a test, rheumatologists were more likely to order the test than dermatologists.
In deciding on initial treatment, “rheumatologists were more likely to always initiate hydroxychloroquine than dermatologists,” said Dr. Arkin. Of the rheumatologists, 49% always initiated hydroxychloroquine, compared with 14% of the dermatologists (P less than .001).
In contrast, “dermatologists were more likely to always initiate topical therapy than the rheumatologists,” said Dr. Arkin. Topical therapy was always started by 81% of the dermatologists and 33% of the rheumatologists (P less than .001).
Although the specialties differed in whether they always initiated a certain treatment, “hydroxychloroquine achieved consensus as first-line therapy,” Dr. Arkin noted, with 81% of dermatologists and 87% of rheumatologists choosing hydroxychloroquine when the survey asked for a first-line systemic therapy.
There was no consensus about which agents were best for add-on therapy. Of the dermatologists, 32% would sometimes use methotrexate, which was used by 21% of rheumatologists for refractory skin disease. Quinacrine was used as add-on therapy by 21% of dermatologists and 15% of rheumatologists. Rheumatologists were significantly more likely to add dapsone than dermatologists (28% vs. 5%, P = .002).
The survey points to the need to develop consensus guidelines in the treatment of pediatric DLE, said Dr. Arkin. “Knowledge gaps include risk factors for SLE, optimal screening, and therapy,” she explained. “Collection of robust longitudinal data will aid in developing pediatric consensus guidelines for DLE.”
Dr. Arkin had no conflicts of interest.
koakes@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @karioakes
CHICAGO – With no consensus guidelines, rheumatologists and dermatologists have significant practice-based differences in their treatment of children with discoid lupus erythematosus, according to a survey of the two specialties.
The survey’s results from 57 pediatric dermatologists and 47 pediatric rheumatologists showed a lack of consensus between the two specialties in how to screen for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The two specialties also differed in identification of which features of discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) might predispose children to developing SLE, and in some therapy choices for DLE.
Although rare in children, DLE may develop into systemic lupus erythematosus in about 25%-30% of pediatric patients, according to Lisa Arkin, MD, who shared the survey results during a poster presentation at the World Congress of Pediatric Dermatology.
Dr. Arkin and her colleagues conducted a Web-based survey to examine differences in DLE treatment practice patterns between pediatric dermatologists and pediatric rheumatologists. They sent the survey to 292 members of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA), and to 200 members of the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance (PeDRA), and received responses from 44% of the rheumatologists and 56% of the dermatologists. Of those, 57 dermatologists and 47 rheumatologists met inclusion criteria for the study.
More than half of the respondents in each specialty had seen fewer than 10 patients with skin-limited DLE, and fewer than 10 patients with SLE and DLE, over the course of their careers, said Dr. Arkin, director of pediatric dermatology at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Consensus was defined by Dr. Arkin and her colleagues as greater than 70% agreement from both specialties, and 2-sided P values less than .05 showed practice differences between rheumatologists and dermatologists.
Clinicians reached a consensus that the presence of either arthritis or nephritis in a pediatric patient with DLE put the patient at high risk for SLE. Arthritis was identified as a high-risk feature by 41 of 57 dermatologists (72%) and 36 of 47 rheumatologists (77%), while nephritis was seen as a high-risk feature by 39 dermatologists (68%) and 37 rheumatologists (79%). However, said Dr. Arkin, “no other features from a list of 30 risk factors including demographics, clinical, or laboratory features achieved consensus.”
In deciding which laboratory studies to order to screen for SLE upon DLE diagnosis, 26 dermatologists (46%) and 38 rheumatologists (81%) choose a full screening panel, according to the survey results. That was a significant between-specialty difference (P less than .001). The full panel consisted of obtaining a complete blood count with differential, testing for renal and hepatic function, obtaining the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and doing urine studies. The panel also included testing for complements, autoantibodies including anti–double-stranded DNA, single-stranded A and B, ribonucleoprotein, anti-Smith, and antiphospholipid antibodies.
However, when individual laboratory studies were examined, several did achieve consensus for baseline screening. Those included the CBC with differential; urinalysis (but not urine protein creatinine), ESR (but not CRP); complement, renal, and hepatic function testing; and most autoantibody testing (but not antiphospholipid antibody testing). Where there were differences in likelihood to order a test, rheumatologists were more likely to order the test than dermatologists.
In deciding on initial treatment, “rheumatologists were more likely to always initiate hydroxychloroquine than dermatologists,” said Dr. Arkin. Of the rheumatologists, 49% always initiated hydroxychloroquine, compared with 14% of the dermatologists (P less than .001).
In contrast, “dermatologists were more likely to always initiate topical therapy than the rheumatologists,” said Dr. Arkin. Topical therapy was always started by 81% of the dermatologists and 33% of the rheumatologists (P less than .001).
Although the specialties differed in whether they always initiated a certain treatment, “hydroxychloroquine achieved consensus as first-line therapy,” Dr. Arkin noted, with 81% of dermatologists and 87% of rheumatologists choosing hydroxychloroquine when the survey asked for a first-line systemic therapy.
There was no consensus about which agents were best for add-on therapy. Of the dermatologists, 32% would sometimes use methotrexate, which was used by 21% of rheumatologists for refractory skin disease. Quinacrine was used as add-on therapy by 21% of dermatologists and 15% of rheumatologists. Rheumatologists were significantly more likely to add dapsone than dermatologists (28% vs. 5%, P = .002).
The survey points to the need to develop consensus guidelines in the treatment of pediatric DLE, said Dr. Arkin. “Knowledge gaps include risk factors for SLE, optimal screening, and therapy,” she explained. “Collection of robust longitudinal data will aid in developing pediatric consensus guidelines for DLE.”
Dr. Arkin had no conflicts of interest.
koakes@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @karioakes
AT WCPD 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The two specialties reached a consensus in identifying 2 of 30 potential high-risk features for the development of systemic lupus erythematosus.
Data source: Survey results from 57 pediatric dermatologists and 47 pediatric rheumatologists who treat children with DLE.Disclosures: Dr. Arkin had no relevant financial conflicts.
Localized wheezing differs from asthmatic, viral wheezing
CHICAGO – , explained Erik Hysinger, MD, MS, of the division of pulmonary medicine at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital.
Localized wheezing is not consistent with asthmatic or viral wheezing, which is typically diffuse and polyphonic, Dr. Hysinger emphasized at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
“Localized wheezing is less common than diffuse wheezing and typically has a homophonous sound,” Dr. Hysinger said. It also usually arises from a central airway pathology. “High flow rates create loud amplitude sounds.”
Dr. Hysinger also covered management strategies for focal wheezing, starting with an initial trial of bronchodilators. Any wheezing resulting from a central airway problem, however, isn’t likely to respond to bronchodilators. Standard work-up for any of these causes is usually a chest x-ray, often paired with a bronchoscopy. Persistent wheezing likely needs a chest CT, and many of these conditions will require referral to a subspecialist.
Airway occlusion diagnoses
Four potential causes of an airway blockage are a foreign body, a bronchial cast, mucous plugs, or airway tumors.
A foreign body typically occurs with a cough, wheezing, stridor, and respiratory distress. It is most common in children under age 4 years, usually in those without a history of aspiration, yet providers initially misdiagnose more than 20% of patients with a foreign body. The foreign object – often coins, food, or batteries – frequently ends up in the right main bronchus and may go undetected up to a month, potentially leading to pneumonia, abscess, atelectasis, bronchiectasis, or airway erosion.
An endobronchial cast is rarer than a foreign body, but can be large enough to completely fill a lung with branching mucin, fibrin, and inflammatory cells. The wheezing sounds homophonous, with a barky or brassy cough accompanied by atelectasis. Dr. Hysinger recommended ordering chest x-ray, echocardiogram, and bronchoscopy. Although often idiopathic, these casts also can result from asthma or another disease: neutrophilic inflammation typically indicates a heart condition whereas asthma or influenza leads to eosinophilic inflammation.
Treatment should involve clearing the airway, followed by hypertonic saline, an inhaled tissue plasminogen activator, and a bronchoscopy for extraction.
Although distinct from endobronchial casts, a mucus plug also presents with wheezing, a cough, and atelectasis, and potentially respiratory distress or failure, and hypoxemia. Mucus plugs are diagnosed with a chest x-ray and flexible bronchoscopy, and then treated by removing the plug and clearing the airway, hypertonic saline, and mucolytics.
The rarest cause of an airway blockage is an airway tumor, often mistaken for asthma. Benign causes include papillomatosis, hemangioma, and hamartomas, while potentially malignant causes include a carcinoid, mucoepidermoid carcinoma, inflammatory myofibromas, and granular cell tumors.
In addition to a chest x-ray and bronchoscopy, a chest CT scan plus a biopsy and resection are necessary to diagnose airway tumors. Treatment will depend on the specific type of tumor identified.
“Overall survival is excellent,” Dr. Hysinger said of children with airway tumors.
Airway narrowing diagnoses
Two possible diagnoses for an intrinsic airway narrowing include bronchomalacia, occurring in only 1 of 2,100 children, and bronchial stenosis.
In bronchomalacia – diagnosed primarily with bronchoscopy – the airway collapses from weakening of the cartilage and posterior membrane. Bronchomalacia sounds like homophonous wheezing with a barky or brassy cough, and it’s frequently accompanied by recurrent bronchitis and/or pneumonia. Intervention is rarely necessary when occurring on its own, but severe cases may require endobronchial stents. Dr. Hysinger also recommended considering ipratroprium instead of albuterol.
Bronchial stenosis involves a fixed narrowing of the bronchi and can be congenital – typically occurring with heart disease – or acquired after an intubation and suction trauma or bronchiolitis obliterans (“popcorn lung”). A chest x-ray and bronchoscopy again are standard, but MRI may be necessary as well. Aside from helping the patient clear the airway, bronchial stenosis typically needs limited management unless the patient is symptomatic. In that case, options include balloon dilation, endobronchial stents, or a slide bronchoplasty.
Airway compression diagnoses
An extrinsic airway compression could have a vascular cause or could result from pressure by an extrinsic mass or the axial skeleton.
Vascular compression usually occurs due to abnormal vasculature development, particularly with vascular stents, Dr. Hysinger said. The wheezing presents with stridor, feeding intolerance, recurrent infections, and cyanotic episodes. The work-up should include a chest x-ray, bronchoscopy, and a chest CT and/or MRI. A variety of interventions may be necessary to treat it, including an aortopexy, pulmonary artery trunk–pexy, arterioplasty, vessel implantation, or endobronchial stent. Residual malacia may remain after treatment, however.
The most common reasons for airway compression by some kind of mass is a reactive lymphadenopathy, a tumor, or an infection, including tuberculosis or histoplasmosis. Severe narrowing of the airway can lead to respiratory failure, but because the compression can develop slowly, the wheezing can be mistaken for asthma. In addition to a chest CT and bronchoscopy, a patient will need other work-ups depending on the cause. Possibilities include a biopsy, a gastric aspirate (for tuberculosis), a bronchoalveolar lavage, or antibody titers.
Similarly, because therapeutic intervention requires treating the underlying infection, specific treatments will vary. Tumors typically will need resection, chemotherapy, and/or radiation – and, until the airway is fully cleared, the patient may need chronic mechanical ventilation.
Children with severe scoliosis or kyphosis are those most likely to experience airway compression resulting from pressure by the axial skeleton, in which the spine’s curvature directly presses on the airway. In addition to the wheeze, these patients may have respiratory distress or recurrent focal pneumonia, Dr. Hysinger said. The standard work-up involves a chest x-ray, chest CT, spinal MRI, and bronchoscopy.
Consider using spinal rods, but they can both help the condition or potentially exacerbate the compression, Dr. Hysinger said. Either way, children also will need help with airway clearance and coughing.
Dr. Hysinger concluded by reviewing what you may consider changing in your current practice, including the initial trial of bronchodilators, a chest x-ray, and a subspecialist referral.
No funding was used for this presentation, and Dr. Hysinger reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
CHICAGO – , explained Erik Hysinger, MD, MS, of the division of pulmonary medicine at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital.
Localized wheezing is not consistent with asthmatic or viral wheezing, which is typically diffuse and polyphonic, Dr. Hysinger emphasized at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
“Localized wheezing is less common than diffuse wheezing and typically has a homophonous sound,” Dr. Hysinger said. It also usually arises from a central airway pathology. “High flow rates create loud amplitude sounds.”
Dr. Hysinger also covered management strategies for focal wheezing, starting with an initial trial of bronchodilators. Any wheezing resulting from a central airway problem, however, isn’t likely to respond to bronchodilators. Standard work-up for any of these causes is usually a chest x-ray, often paired with a bronchoscopy. Persistent wheezing likely needs a chest CT, and many of these conditions will require referral to a subspecialist.
Airway occlusion diagnoses
Four potential causes of an airway blockage are a foreign body, a bronchial cast, mucous plugs, or airway tumors.
A foreign body typically occurs with a cough, wheezing, stridor, and respiratory distress. It is most common in children under age 4 years, usually in those without a history of aspiration, yet providers initially misdiagnose more than 20% of patients with a foreign body. The foreign object – often coins, food, or batteries – frequently ends up in the right main bronchus and may go undetected up to a month, potentially leading to pneumonia, abscess, atelectasis, bronchiectasis, or airway erosion.
An endobronchial cast is rarer than a foreign body, but can be large enough to completely fill a lung with branching mucin, fibrin, and inflammatory cells. The wheezing sounds homophonous, with a barky or brassy cough accompanied by atelectasis. Dr. Hysinger recommended ordering chest x-ray, echocardiogram, and bronchoscopy. Although often idiopathic, these casts also can result from asthma or another disease: neutrophilic inflammation typically indicates a heart condition whereas asthma or influenza leads to eosinophilic inflammation.
Treatment should involve clearing the airway, followed by hypertonic saline, an inhaled tissue plasminogen activator, and a bronchoscopy for extraction.
Although distinct from endobronchial casts, a mucus plug also presents with wheezing, a cough, and atelectasis, and potentially respiratory distress or failure, and hypoxemia. Mucus plugs are diagnosed with a chest x-ray and flexible bronchoscopy, and then treated by removing the plug and clearing the airway, hypertonic saline, and mucolytics.
The rarest cause of an airway blockage is an airway tumor, often mistaken for asthma. Benign causes include papillomatosis, hemangioma, and hamartomas, while potentially malignant causes include a carcinoid, mucoepidermoid carcinoma, inflammatory myofibromas, and granular cell tumors.
In addition to a chest x-ray and bronchoscopy, a chest CT scan plus a biopsy and resection are necessary to diagnose airway tumors. Treatment will depend on the specific type of tumor identified.
“Overall survival is excellent,” Dr. Hysinger said of children with airway tumors.
Airway narrowing diagnoses
Two possible diagnoses for an intrinsic airway narrowing include bronchomalacia, occurring in only 1 of 2,100 children, and bronchial stenosis.
In bronchomalacia – diagnosed primarily with bronchoscopy – the airway collapses from weakening of the cartilage and posterior membrane. Bronchomalacia sounds like homophonous wheezing with a barky or brassy cough, and it’s frequently accompanied by recurrent bronchitis and/or pneumonia. Intervention is rarely necessary when occurring on its own, but severe cases may require endobronchial stents. Dr. Hysinger also recommended considering ipratroprium instead of albuterol.
Bronchial stenosis involves a fixed narrowing of the bronchi and can be congenital – typically occurring with heart disease – or acquired after an intubation and suction trauma or bronchiolitis obliterans (“popcorn lung”). A chest x-ray and bronchoscopy again are standard, but MRI may be necessary as well. Aside from helping the patient clear the airway, bronchial stenosis typically needs limited management unless the patient is symptomatic. In that case, options include balloon dilation, endobronchial stents, or a slide bronchoplasty.
Airway compression diagnoses
An extrinsic airway compression could have a vascular cause or could result from pressure by an extrinsic mass or the axial skeleton.
Vascular compression usually occurs due to abnormal vasculature development, particularly with vascular stents, Dr. Hysinger said. The wheezing presents with stridor, feeding intolerance, recurrent infections, and cyanotic episodes. The work-up should include a chest x-ray, bronchoscopy, and a chest CT and/or MRI. A variety of interventions may be necessary to treat it, including an aortopexy, pulmonary artery trunk–pexy, arterioplasty, vessel implantation, or endobronchial stent. Residual malacia may remain after treatment, however.
The most common reasons for airway compression by some kind of mass is a reactive lymphadenopathy, a tumor, or an infection, including tuberculosis or histoplasmosis. Severe narrowing of the airway can lead to respiratory failure, but because the compression can develop slowly, the wheezing can be mistaken for asthma. In addition to a chest CT and bronchoscopy, a patient will need other work-ups depending on the cause. Possibilities include a biopsy, a gastric aspirate (for tuberculosis), a bronchoalveolar lavage, or antibody titers.
Similarly, because therapeutic intervention requires treating the underlying infection, specific treatments will vary. Tumors typically will need resection, chemotherapy, and/or radiation – and, until the airway is fully cleared, the patient may need chronic mechanical ventilation.
Children with severe scoliosis or kyphosis are those most likely to experience airway compression resulting from pressure by the axial skeleton, in which the spine’s curvature directly presses on the airway. In addition to the wheeze, these patients may have respiratory distress or recurrent focal pneumonia, Dr. Hysinger said. The standard work-up involves a chest x-ray, chest CT, spinal MRI, and bronchoscopy.
Consider using spinal rods, but they can both help the condition or potentially exacerbate the compression, Dr. Hysinger said. Either way, children also will need help with airway clearance and coughing.
Dr. Hysinger concluded by reviewing what you may consider changing in your current practice, including the initial trial of bronchodilators, a chest x-ray, and a subspecialist referral.
No funding was used for this presentation, and Dr. Hysinger reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
CHICAGO – , explained Erik Hysinger, MD, MS, of the division of pulmonary medicine at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital.
Localized wheezing is not consistent with asthmatic or viral wheezing, which is typically diffuse and polyphonic, Dr. Hysinger emphasized at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
“Localized wheezing is less common than diffuse wheezing and typically has a homophonous sound,” Dr. Hysinger said. It also usually arises from a central airway pathology. “High flow rates create loud amplitude sounds.”
Dr. Hysinger also covered management strategies for focal wheezing, starting with an initial trial of bronchodilators. Any wheezing resulting from a central airway problem, however, isn’t likely to respond to bronchodilators. Standard work-up for any of these causes is usually a chest x-ray, often paired with a bronchoscopy. Persistent wheezing likely needs a chest CT, and many of these conditions will require referral to a subspecialist.
Airway occlusion diagnoses
Four potential causes of an airway blockage are a foreign body, a bronchial cast, mucous plugs, or airway tumors.
A foreign body typically occurs with a cough, wheezing, stridor, and respiratory distress. It is most common in children under age 4 years, usually in those without a history of aspiration, yet providers initially misdiagnose more than 20% of patients with a foreign body. The foreign object – often coins, food, or batteries – frequently ends up in the right main bronchus and may go undetected up to a month, potentially leading to pneumonia, abscess, atelectasis, bronchiectasis, or airway erosion.
An endobronchial cast is rarer than a foreign body, but can be large enough to completely fill a lung with branching mucin, fibrin, and inflammatory cells. The wheezing sounds homophonous, with a barky or brassy cough accompanied by atelectasis. Dr. Hysinger recommended ordering chest x-ray, echocardiogram, and bronchoscopy. Although often idiopathic, these casts also can result from asthma or another disease: neutrophilic inflammation typically indicates a heart condition whereas asthma or influenza leads to eosinophilic inflammation.
Treatment should involve clearing the airway, followed by hypertonic saline, an inhaled tissue plasminogen activator, and a bronchoscopy for extraction.
Although distinct from endobronchial casts, a mucus plug also presents with wheezing, a cough, and atelectasis, and potentially respiratory distress or failure, and hypoxemia. Mucus plugs are diagnosed with a chest x-ray and flexible bronchoscopy, and then treated by removing the plug and clearing the airway, hypertonic saline, and mucolytics.
The rarest cause of an airway blockage is an airway tumor, often mistaken for asthma. Benign causes include papillomatosis, hemangioma, and hamartomas, while potentially malignant causes include a carcinoid, mucoepidermoid carcinoma, inflammatory myofibromas, and granular cell tumors.
In addition to a chest x-ray and bronchoscopy, a chest CT scan plus a biopsy and resection are necessary to diagnose airway tumors. Treatment will depend on the specific type of tumor identified.
“Overall survival is excellent,” Dr. Hysinger said of children with airway tumors.
Airway narrowing diagnoses
Two possible diagnoses for an intrinsic airway narrowing include bronchomalacia, occurring in only 1 of 2,100 children, and bronchial stenosis.
In bronchomalacia – diagnosed primarily with bronchoscopy – the airway collapses from weakening of the cartilage and posterior membrane. Bronchomalacia sounds like homophonous wheezing with a barky or brassy cough, and it’s frequently accompanied by recurrent bronchitis and/or pneumonia. Intervention is rarely necessary when occurring on its own, but severe cases may require endobronchial stents. Dr. Hysinger also recommended considering ipratroprium instead of albuterol.
Bronchial stenosis involves a fixed narrowing of the bronchi and can be congenital – typically occurring with heart disease – or acquired after an intubation and suction trauma or bronchiolitis obliterans (“popcorn lung”). A chest x-ray and bronchoscopy again are standard, but MRI may be necessary as well. Aside from helping the patient clear the airway, bronchial stenosis typically needs limited management unless the patient is symptomatic. In that case, options include balloon dilation, endobronchial stents, or a slide bronchoplasty.
Airway compression diagnoses
An extrinsic airway compression could have a vascular cause or could result from pressure by an extrinsic mass or the axial skeleton.
Vascular compression usually occurs due to abnormal vasculature development, particularly with vascular stents, Dr. Hysinger said. The wheezing presents with stridor, feeding intolerance, recurrent infections, and cyanotic episodes. The work-up should include a chest x-ray, bronchoscopy, and a chest CT and/or MRI. A variety of interventions may be necessary to treat it, including an aortopexy, pulmonary artery trunk–pexy, arterioplasty, vessel implantation, or endobronchial stent. Residual malacia may remain after treatment, however.
The most common reasons for airway compression by some kind of mass is a reactive lymphadenopathy, a tumor, or an infection, including tuberculosis or histoplasmosis. Severe narrowing of the airway can lead to respiratory failure, but because the compression can develop slowly, the wheezing can be mistaken for asthma. In addition to a chest CT and bronchoscopy, a patient will need other work-ups depending on the cause. Possibilities include a biopsy, a gastric aspirate (for tuberculosis), a bronchoalveolar lavage, or antibody titers.
Similarly, because therapeutic intervention requires treating the underlying infection, specific treatments will vary. Tumors typically will need resection, chemotherapy, and/or radiation – and, until the airway is fully cleared, the patient may need chronic mechanical ventilation.
Children with severe scoliosis or kyphosis are those most likely to experience airway compression resulting from pressure by the axial skeleton, in which the spine’s curvature directly presses on the airway. In addition to the wheeze, these patients may have respiratory distress or recurrent focal pneumonia, Dr. Hysinger said. The standard work-up involves a chest x-ray, chest CT, spinal MRI, and bronchoscopy.
Consider using spinal rods, but they can both help the condition or potentially exacerbate the compression, Dr. Hysinger said. Either way, children also will need help with airway clearance and coughing.
Dr. Hysinger concluded by reviewing what you may consider changing in your current practice, including the initial trial of bronchodilators, a chest x-ray, and a subspecialist referral.
No funding was used for this presentation, and Dr. Hysinger reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM AAP 2017
Hep C screening falling short in neonatal abstinence syndrome infants
SAN DIEGO – A review of care for neonates born with neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) found that screening for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is low, based on Medicaid data from the state of Kentucky.
“These children are at high risk for HCV, and the screening rate should really be 100%. We think that it is important to get the message out there,” said Michael Smith, MD, of the department of pediatrics at the Duke University, Durham, N.C.
According to the Kentucky Medicaid data, the rates of NAS are not evenly distributed in the state. Stratifying the incidence rates by eight regions, Dr. Smith reported that 33% of the NAS births in 2016 were in region 8. Although region 8 is a rural Appalachian section on the eastern border of the state, the proportion in this region was more than 50% greater than any other region, including the more populated regions containing Louisville, the largest city, and Lexington, the capital.
Statewide, approximately one in three newborns with NAS were screened for HCV, but the rate was as low as 5% in some areas, and low rates were more common in those counties with the highest rates of opioid use and NAS, Dr. Smith said at an annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases. Although he acknowledged that rates of HCV screening in newborns with NAS appeared to be increasing when 2015 and 2012 data were compared, “there is still a long way to go.”
“Why is this important? There are a couple of reasons. One is that, if you get children into care early, you are more likely to have follow-up,” Dr. Smith said. Follow-up will be important if, as Dr. Smith predicted, HCV therapies become available for children. When providers know which children are infected, treatment can be initiated more efficiently, and this has implications for risk of transmission and, potentially, for outcomes.
At the University of Louisville, children with NAS are typically screened for HCV, HIV, and other transmissible infections that “travel together,” such as syphilis. The evaluation of the Medicaid data suggested that there were no differences in likelihood of HCV testing for sex and race, but Dr. Smith noted that children placed in foster care were significantly more likely to be tested, likely a reflection of processing regulations.
Overall, there are striking differences in the rates of opioid use, rates of NAS, and likelihood of HCV testing in NAS neonates in eastern Appalachian regions of Kentucky and those in regions in the center of the state closer to academic medical centers. The three regions near the University of Louisville, University of Kentucky in Lexington, and the Ohio River border with Cincinnati are known as “the Golden Triangle,” according to Dr. Smith; these regions are where HCV testing rates in neonates with NAS are higher, but testing still is not uniform.
Currently, HCV testing is mandated for adults in several states, but Dr. Smith emphasized that children with NAS are particularly “vulnerable.” He called for policy changes that would require testing in these children and urged HCV screening regardless of whether official policies are established.
SAN DIEGO – A review of care for neonates born with neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) found that screening for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is low, based on Medicaid data from the state of Kentucky.
“These children are at high risk for HCV, and the screening rate should really be 100%. We think that it is important to get the message out there,” said Michael Smith, MD, of the department of pediatrics at the Duke University, Durham, N.C.
According to the Kentucky Medicaid data, the rates of NAS are not evenly distributed in the state. Stratifying the incidence rates by eight regions, Dr. Smith reported that 33% of the NAS births in 2016 were in region 8. Although region 8 is a rural Appalachian section on the eastern border of the state, the proportion in this region was more than 50% greater than any other region, including the more populated regions containing Louisville, the largest city, and Lexington, the capital.
Statewide, approximately one in three newborns with NAS were screened for HCV, but the rate was as low as 5% in some areas, and low rates were more common in those counties with the highest rates of opioid use and NAS, Dr. Smith said at an annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases. Although he acknowledged that rates of HCV screening in newborns with NAS appeared to be increasing when 2015 and 2012 data were compared, “there is still a long way to go.”
“Why is this important? There are a couple of reasons. One is that, if you get children into care early, you are more likely to have follow-up,” Dr. Smith said. Follow-up will be important if, as Dr. Smith predicted, HCV therapies become available for children. When providers know which children are infected, treatment can be initiated more efficiently, and this has implications for risk of transmission and, potentially, for outcomes.
At the University of Louisville, children with NAS are typically screened for HCV, HIV, and other transmissible infections that “travel together,” such as syphilis. The evaluation of the Medicaid data suggested that there were no differences in likelihood of HCV testing for sex and race, but Dr. Smith noted that children placed in foster care were significantly more likely to be tested, likely a reflection of processing regulations.
Overall, there are striking differences in the rates of opioid use, rates of NAS, and likelihood of HCV testing in NAS neonates in eastern Appalachian regions of Kentucky and those in regions in the center of the state closer to academic medical centers. The three regions near the University of Louisville, University of Kentucky in Lexington, and the Ohio River border with Cincinnati are known as “the Golden Triangle,” according to Dr. Smith; these regions are where HCV testing rates in neonates with NAS are higher, but testing still is not uniform.
Currently, HCV testing is mandated for adults in several states, but Dr. Smith emphasized that children with NAS are particularly “vulnerable.” He called for policy changes that would require testing in these children and urged HCV screening regardless of whether official policies are established.
SAN DIEGO – A review of care for neonates born with neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) found that screening for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is low, based on Medicaid data from the state of Kentucky.
“These children are at high risk for HCV, and the screening rate should really be 100%. We think that it is important to get the message out there,” said Michael Smith, MD, of the department of pediatrics at the Duke University, Durham, N.C.
According to the Kentucky Medicaid data, the rates of NAS are not evenly distributed in the state. Stratifying the incidence rates by eight regions, Dr. Smith reported that 33% of the NAS births in 2016 were in region 8. Although region 8 is a rural Appalachian section on the eastern border of the state, the proportion in this region was more than 50% greater than any other region, including the more populated regions containing Louisville, the largest city, and Lexington, the capital.
Statewide, approximately one in three newborns with NAS were screened for HCV, but the rate was as low as 5% in some areas, and low rates were more common in those counties with the highest rates of opioid use and NAS, Dr. Smith said at an annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases. Although he acknowledged that rates of HCV screening in newborns with NAS appeared to be increasing when 2015 and 2012 data were compared, “there is still a long way to go.”
“Why is this important? There are a couple of reasons. One is that, if you get children into care early, you are more likely to have follow-up,” Dr. Smith said. Follow-up will be important if, as Dr. Smith predicted, HCV therapies become available for children. When providers know which children are infected, treatment can be initiated more efficiently, and this has implications for risk of transmission and, potentially, for outcomes.
At the University of Louisville, children with NAS are typically screened for HCV, HIV, and other transmissible infections that “travel together,” such as syphilis. The evaluation of the Medicaid data suggested that there were no differences in likelihood of HCV testing for sex and race, but Dr. Smith noted that children placed in foster care were significantly more likely to be tested, likely a reflection of processing regulations.
Overall, there are striking differences in the rates of opioid use, rates of NAS, and likelihood of HCV testing in NAS neonates in eastern Appalachian regions of Kentucky and those in regions in the center of the state closer to academic medical centers. The three regions near the University of Louisville, University of Kentucky in Lexington, and the Ohio River border with Cincinnati are known as “the Golden Triangle,” according to Dr. Smith; these regions are where HCV testing rates in neonates with NAS are higher, but testing still is not uniform.
Currently, HCV testing is mandated for adults in several states, but Dr. Smith emphasized that children with NAS are particularly “vulnerable.” He called for policy changes that would require testing in these children and urged HCV screening regardless of whether official policies are established.
AT ID WEEK 2017
Key clinical point: In Kentucky, which has one of the highest rates of neonates with NAS, screening rates for HCV remain low.
Major finding:
Data source: Retrospective data analysis of Kentucky Medicaid data.
Disclosures: Dr. Smith reported no financial relationships relevant to this study.
Consider the siblings
Robert is a 5-year-old boy who presents for an autism diagnostic evaluation accompanied by his parents, who report longstanding concerns about their son’s communication difficulties. Robert has an older brother who has been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Robert’s caregivers have noticed his tendency to “copy cat” others and often repeat phrases from television or movies. Robert and his family provided additional history and, after a multidisciplinary evaluation, he was diagnosed as fitting the criteria for ASD. Our team spoke with Robert’s parents about their impressions and recommendations and further explored the family history and ways in which the family functions. Robert lives with his parents and four siblings (one older and three younger, including a set of fraternal twins), most of whom display language impairments and difficulties with emotional regulation, as well. Robert’s mother also discloses that she is pregnant again. “Where do we go from here?” Robert’s mother wonders. “Our family is already so affected by autism, should I be worried about the other children?”
Discussion
It’s well established that genetic factors play a significant role in the etiology of autism spectrum disorders, other neurodevelopmental disorders, and a vast array of mental health problems. Although quite complicated and multifactorial, heritability estimates garnered from twin studies for autism range up to well above 50%1, and although finding specific genetic causes of nonsyndromic autism is the exception to the rule, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is recommended as a first-line genetic test for those with autism. Recent literature has shown that molecular diagnoses of ASD are found in about 9% of the population studied2, and families should be aware that genetic testing can potentially help make decisions about clinical management and can inform discussions about recurrence risk.
Families should be made aware that sibling recurrence rates of autism have been found to be around 20 times higher than the prevalence within the general population3. Certainly having one child with autism can afford a significant risk for parents having another child with the same disorder, and researchers are learning more about the influence of gender on such risk4. Curiously, siblings born after an older sister with autism seem to have a higher risk of ASD than if they were born after an older brother with autism. The authors of this study note, however, that even for those with the highest risk (younger brothers with an older sister with autism had about a 17% probability of recurrence), odds are they will be unaffected by autism. Complicating matters is the notion of the broad autism phenotype (BAP – denoting those who may have features of autism but do not reach diagnostic threshold) with literature indicating at least one BAP trait was found in about 50% of family members of those with ASD5.
In addition, autism also may share genetic vulnerabilities with other conditions – parental psychiatric diagnoses have been found to increase the risk for ASD in their children, and ASD frequently co-occurs with a constellation of other disorders – including anxiety disorders, intellectual disabilities, ADHD, and learning problems. This information can be helpful to clinicians when they speak with parents about the complicated nature of psychiatric and developmental disorders, and how such disorders can affect the family not only biologically, but through dynamic environmental means, as well. , including parents and siblings6. Data clearly indicate that, if a child carries an autism diagnosis, engaging family in family-based treatment, prevention, surveillance/screening, and general supportive interventions are critical in promoting positive outcomes.
Children and adolescents with ASD are a remarkably heterogeneous group with variable family dynamics; clinically, it’s not uncommon to meet parents from all backgrounds who speak eloquently about the stress they face raising a child with any neurodevelopmental disorder. This stress has been well documented in several scientific articles over the past decade (for mothers more so than fathers) but other family members (for example, typically developing siblings) undoubtedly experience similar stress, but this has been less robustly researched. Literature has, in fact, revealed that children who develop typically and who reside with a sibling who has a disability are more likely (compared with siblings living with other typically developing siblings) to have problems related to interpersonal relationships, school functioning, and use of leisure time7. Undeniably, complicated interactions with one’s functional profile, the quality of a sibling’s symptoms, parental stress, and other variables (parental marital status, birth order, presence of parental depression, available sources of support, etc.) are noted, and clearly, autism’s effects can extend far beyond the “identified patient.”
It’s important to note, however, that not all effects are negative. Siblings can demonstrate positive adjustments when growing up with a brother or sister who has autism. While siblings encounter unique demands (missing out on certain outings, feeling embarrassed by a brother’s social behaviors, having to “take care” of their brother, “why can’t we be a normal family?”), these demands can produce benefits, and parents should be aware that negative effects on siblings are far from inevitable. Siblings actually may show increased empathy, more sophisticated coping skills, and an advanced appreciation for those with developmental challenges, compared with most of their peers. Typically developing siblings can serve not only as a social and play partner for their family member with ASD (fostering social competencies), but also the individual with ASD can serve a positive role in influencing the development of those without ASD8.
All things considered, talking with families about the impact of autism on parents and siblings can be complicated but should focus on the positives while being realistic about potential challenges. It is important to inform families about the risk of recurrence and about the stress that autism can create on siblings while you are assessing a family’s functioning and care-giving burdens. Ultimately, this can help you determine how to offer them the most appropriate, evidence-based, and family-focused care.
Dr. Dickerson, a child and adolescent psychiatrist, is an assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont, Burlington, where he is director of the autism diagnostic clinic. Email him at pdnews@frontlinemedcom.com.
References
1. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2016 May;57(5):585-95.
2. JAMA. 2015;314(9):895-903.
3. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2017 Jul;26(3):555-70.
4. (JAMA Pediatr. 2017 Sep 25. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.2832).
5. J Autism Dev Disord. 2007 Mar; 37(3):523-36.
6. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016;73(6):622-9.
7. Pediatrics. 2013. doi: 10.1542/peds.2013-0644.
Robert is a 5-year-old boy who presents for an autism diagnostic evaluation accompanied by his parents, who report longstanding concerns about their son’s communication difficulties. Robert has an older brother who has been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Robert’s caregivers have noticed his tendency to “copy cat” others and often repeat phrases from television or movies. Robert and his family provided additional history and, after a multidisciplinary evaluation, he was diagnosed as fitting the criteria for ASD. Our team spoke with Robert’s parents about their impressions and recommendations and further explored the family history and ways in which the family functions. Robert lives with his parents and four siblings (one older and three younger, including a set of fraternal twins), most of whom display language impairments and difficulties with emotional regulation, as well. Robert’s mother also discloses that she is pregnant again. “Where do we go from here?” Robert’s mother wonders. “Our family is already so affected by autism, should I be worried about the other children?”
Discussion
It’s well established that genetic factors play a significant role in the etiology of autism spectrum disorders, other neurodevelopmental disorders, and a vast array of mental health problems. Although quite complicated and multifactorial, heritability estimates garnered from twin studies for autism range up to well above 50%1, and although finding specific genetic causes of nonsyndromic autism is the exception to the rule, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is recommended as a first-line genetic test for those with autism. Recent literature has shown that molecular diagnoses of ASD are found in about 9% of the population studied2, and families should be aware that genetic testing can potentially help make decisions about clinical management and can inform discussions about recurrence risk.
Families should be made aware that sibling recurrence rates of autism have been found to be around 20 times higher than the prevalence within the general population3. Certainly having one child with autism can afford a significant risk for parents having another child with the same disorder, and researchers are learning more about the influence of gender on such risk4. Curiously, siblings born after an older sister with autism seem to have a higher risk of ASD than if they were born after an older brother with autism. The authors of this study note, however, that even for those with the highest risk (younger brothers with an older sister with autism had about a 17% probability of recurrence), odds are they will be unaffected by autism. Complicating matters is the notion of the broad autism phenotype (BAP – denoting those who may have features of autism but do not reach diagnostic threshold) with literature indicating at least one BAP trait was found in about 50% of family members of those with ASD5.
In addition, autism also may share genetic vulnerabilities with other conditions – parental psychiatric diagnoses have been found to increase the risk for ASD in their children, and ASD frequently co-occurs with a constellation of other disorders – including anxiety disorders, intellectual disabilities, ADHD, and learning problems. This information can be helpful to clinicians when they speak with parents about the complicated nature of psychiatric and developmental disorders, and how such disorders can affect the family not only biologically, but through dynamic environmental means, as well. , including parents and siblings6. Data clearly indicate that, if a child carries an autism diagnosis, engaging family in family-based treatment, prevention, surveillance/screening, and general supportive interventions are critical in promoting positive outcomes.
Children and adolescents with ASD are a remarkably heterogeneous group with variable family dynamics; clinically, it’s not uncommon to meet parents from all backgrounds who speak eloquently about the stress they face raising a child with any neurodevelopmental disorder. This stress has been well documented in several scientific articles over the past decade (for mothers more so than fathers) but other family members (for example, typically developing siblings) undoubtedly experience similar stress, but this has been less robustly researched. Literature has, in fact, revealed that children who develop typically and who reside with a sibling who has a disability are more likely (compared with siblings living with other typically developing siblings) to have problems related to interpersonal relationships, school functioning, and use of leisure time7. Undeniably, complicated interactions with one’s functional profile, the quality of a sibling’s symptoms, parental stress, and other variables (parental marital status, birth order, presence of parental depression, available sources of support, etc.) are noted, and clearly, autism’s effects can extend far beyond the “identified patient.”
It’s important to note, however, that not all effects are negative. Siblings can demonstrate positive adjustments when growing up with a brother or sister who has autism. While siblings encounter unique demands (missing out on certain outings, feeling embarrassed by a brother’s social behaviors, having to “take care” of their brother, “why can’t we be a normal family?”), these demands can produce benefits, and parents should be aware that negative effects on siblings are far from inevitable. Siblings actually may show increased empathy, more sophisticated coping skills, and an advanced appreciation for those with developmental challenges, compared with most of their peers. Typically developing siblings can serve not only as a social and play partner for their family member with ASD (fostering social competencies), but also the individual with ASD can serve a positive role in influencing the development of those without ASD8.
All things considered, talking with families about the impact of autism on parents and siblings can be complicated but should focus on the positives while being realistic about potential challenges. It is important to inform families about the risk of recurrence and about the stress that autism can create on siblings while you are assessing a family’s functioning and care-giving burdens. Ultimately, this can help you determine how to offer them the most appropriate, evidence-based, and family-focused care.
Dr. Dickerson, a child and adolescent psychiatrist, is an assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont, Burlington, where he is director of the autism diagnostic clinic. Email him at pdnews@frontlinemedcom.com.
References
1. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2016 May;57(5):585-95.
2. JAMA. 2015;314(9):895-903.
3. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2017 Jul;26(3):555-70.
4. (JAMA Pediatr. 2017 Sep 25. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.2832).
5. J Autism Dev Disord. 2007 Mar; 37(3):523-36.
6. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016;73(6):622-9.
7. Pediatrics. 2013. doi: 10.1542/peds.2013-0644.
Robert is a 5-year-old boy who presents for an autism diagnostic evaluation accompanied by his parents, who report longstanding concerns about their son’s communication difficulties. Robert has an older brother who has been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Robert’s caregivers have noticed his tendency to “copy cat” others and often repeat phrases from television or movies. Robert and his family provided additional history and, after a multidisciplinary evaluation, he was diagnosed as fitting the criteria for ASD. Our team spoke with Robert’s parents about their impressions and recommendations and further explored the family history and ways in which the family functions. Robert lives with his parents and four siblings (one older and three younger, including a set of fraternal twins), most of whom display language impairments and difficulties with emotional regulation, as well. Robert’s mother also discloses that she is pregnant again. “Where do we go from here?” Robert’s mother wonders. “Our family is already so affected by autism, should I be worried about the other children?”
Discussion
It’s well established that genetic factors play a significant role in the etiology of autism spectrum disorders, other neurodevelopmental disorders, and a vast array of mental health problems. Although quite complicated and multifactorial, heritability estimates garnered from twin studies for autism range up to well above 50%1, and although finding specific genetic causes of nonsyndromic autism is the exception to the rule, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is recommended as a first-line genetic test for those with autism. Recent literature has shown that molecular diagnoses of ASD are found in about 9% of the population studied2, and families should be aware that genetic testing can potentially help make decisions about clinical management and can inform discussions about recurrence risk.
Families should be made aware that sibling recurrence rates of autism have been found to be around 20 times higher than the prevalence within the general population3. Certainly having one child with autism can afford a significant risk for parents having another child with the same disorder, and researchers are learning more about the influence of gender on such risk4. Curiously, siblings born after an older sister with autism seem to have a higher risk of ASD than if they were born after an older brother with autism. The authors of this study note, however, that even for those with the highest risk (younger brothers with an older sister with autism had about a 17% probability of recurrence), odds are they will be unaffected by autism. Complicating matters is the notion of the broad autism phenotype (BAP – denoting those who may have features of autism but do not reach diagnostic threshold) with literature indicating at least one BAP trait was found in about 50% of family members of those with ASD5.
In addition, autism also may share genetic vulnerabilities with other conditions – parental psychiatric diagnoses have been found to increase the risk for ASD in their children, and ASD frequently co-occurs with a constellation of other disorders – including anxiety disorders, intellectual disabilities, ADHD, and learning problems. This information can be helpful to clinicians when they speak with parents about the complicated nature of psychiatric and developmental disorders, and how such disorders can affect the family not only biologically, but through dynamic environmental means, as well. , including parents and siblings6. Data clearly indicate that, if a child carries an autism diagnosis, engaging family in family-based treatment, prevention, surveillance/screening, and general supportive interventions are critical in promoting positive outcomes.
Children and adolescents with ASD are a remarkably heterogeneous group with variable family dynamics; clinically, it’s not uncommon to meet parents from all backgrounds who speak eloquently about the stress they face raising a child with any neurodevelopmental disorder. This stress has been well documented in several scientific articles over the past decade (for mothers more so than fathers) but other family members (for example, typically developing siblings) undoubtedly experience similar stress, but this has been less robustly researched. Literature has, in fact, revealed that children who develop typically and who reside with a sibling who has a disability are more likely (compared with siblings living with other typically developing siblings) to have problems related to interpersonal relationships, school functioning, and use of leisure time7. Undeniably, complicated interactions with one’s functional profile, the quality of a sibling’s symptoms, parental stress, and other variables (parental marital status, birth order, presence of parental depression, available sources of support, etc.) are noted, and clearly, autism’s effects can extend far beyond the “identified patient.”
It’s important to note, however, that not all effects are negative. Siblings can demonstrate positive adjustments when growing up with a brother or sister who has autism. While siblings encounter unique demands (missing out on certain outings, feeling embarrassed by a brother’s social behaviors, having to “take care” of their brother, “why can’t we be a normal family?”), these demands can produce benefits, and parents should be aware that negative effects on siblings are far from inevitable. Siblings actually may show increased empathy, more sophisticated coping skills, and an advanced appreciation for those with developmental challenges, compared with most of their peers. Typically developing siblings can serve not only as a social and play partner for their family member with ASD (fostering social competencies), but also the individual with ASD can serve a positive role in influencing the development of those without ASD8.
All things considered, talking with families about the impact of autism on parents and siblings can be complicated but should focus on the positives while being realistic about potential challenges. It is important to inform families about the risk of recurrence and about the stress that autism can create on siblings while you are assessing a family’s functioning and care-giving burdens. Ultimately, this can help you determine how to offer them the most appropriate, evidence-based, and family-focused care.
Dr. Dickerson, a child and adolescent psychiatrist, is an assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont, Burlington, where he is director of the autism diagnostic clinic. Email him at pdnews@frontlinemedcom.com.
References
1. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2016 May;57(5):585-95.
2. JAMA. 2015;314(9):895-903.
3. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2017 Jul;26(3):555-70.
4. (JAMA Pediatr. 2017 Sep 25. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.2832).
5. J Autism Dev Disord. 2007 Mar; 37(3):523-36.
6. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016;73(6):622-9.
7. Pediatrics. 2013. doi: 10.1542/peds.2013-0644.
VIDEO: Celiac disease runs ninefold higher in eosinophilic esophagitis
ORLANDO – Patients with eosinophilic esophagitis had a ninefold increased prevalence of celiac disease, compared with the general public, in a review of more than 35 million U.S. residents.
This finding, which corresponded to a 2% overall prevalence rate of celiac disease in patients diagnosed with eosinophilic esophagitis, suggests that routine screening for celiac disease in eosinophilic esophagitis patients is warranted, Emad Mansoor, MD, said at the World Congress of Gastroenterology at ACG 2017.
This high prevalence level “has great implications for how we screen, treat, and manage” patients with either disorder, Dr. Mansoor said in a video interview. He hypothesized that celiac disease and eosinophilic esophagitis could share genetic etiologies or environmental or autoimmune triggers that produce the high level of overlap that the results showed.
The same analysis also found high rates of celiac disease in patients with either eosinophilic gastroenteritis or colitis, but because these are both much less prevalent than eosiniphillic esophagitis the absolute number of patients with either of these eosinophilic disorders who also had celiac disease was much lower.
It’s very possible that the prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis among patients with celiac disease is also significantly elevated, compared with the general population, but he and his associates have not run this analysis.
Their study included diagnostic records for 35,795,250 people in the Explorys database during May 2012 to May 2017, with entries from 317,000 providers at 360 U.S. hospitals. The review identified 84,040 patients with a diagnosis of celiac disease, 15,360 with eosinophilic esophagitis, 1,440 with eosinophilic gastritis, and 800 with eosinophilic colitis. This worked out to a 5-year prevalence rate of 234.8 cases of celiac disease per 100,000 patients (0.235%), an eosinophilic esophagitis prevalence of 43.7 per 100,000, an eosinophilic gastroenteritis rate of 4.0 per 100,000, and an eosinophilic colitis rate of 2.2 per 100,000, said Dr. Mansoor, a gastroenterologist at University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center.
The prevalence of celiac disease among patients with eosinophilic gastroenteritis or colitis was higher than in the eosinophilic esophagitis patients, with rates of 3.5% and 3.7%, respectively, that translated into odds ratios about 16-fold higher than the prevalence rates in the general population for both of these eosionophilic disorders.
The analyses reported by Dr. Mansoor also showed that the prevalence of celiac disease among patients with eosinophilic esophagitis was nearly twice as high in children (not more than 18 years old) as in adults and 50% higher in women than in men. These age and sex differences were both statistically significant.
Dr. Mansoor had no disclosures.
mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
ORLANDO – Patients with eosinophilic esophagitis had a ninefold increased prevalence of celiac disease, compared with the general public, in a review of more than 35 million U.S. residents.
This finding, which corresponded to a 2% overall prevalence rate of celiac disease in patients diagnosed with eosinophilic esophagitis, suggests that routine screening for celiac disease in eosinophilic esophagitis patients is warranted, Emad Mansoor, MD, said at the World Congress of Gastroenterology at ACG 2017.
This high prevalence level “has great implications for how we screen, treat, and manage” patients with either disorder, Dr. Mansoor said in a video interview. He hypothesized that celiac disease and eosinophilic esophagitis could share genetic etiologies or environmental or autoimmune triggers that produce the high level of overlap that the results showed.
The same analysis also found high rates of celiac disease in patients with either eosinophilic gastroenteritis or colitis, but because these are both much less prevalent than eosiniphillic esophagitis the absolute number of patients with either of these eosinophilic disorders who also had celiac disease was much lower.
It’s very possible that the prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis among patients with celiac disease is also significantly elevated, compared with the general population, but he and his associates have not run this analysis.
Their study included diagnostic records for 35,795,250 people in the Explorys database during May 2012 to May 2017, with entries from 317,000 providers at 360 U.S. hospitals. The review identified 84,040 patients with a diagnosis of celiac disease, 15,360 with eosinophilic esophagitis, 1,440 with eosinophilic gastritis, and 800 with eosinophilic colitis. This worked out to a 5-year prevalence rate of 234.8 cases of celiac disease per 100,000 patients (0.235%), an eosinophilic esophagitis prevalence of 43.7 per 100,000, an eosinophilic gastroenteritis rate of 4.0 per 100,000, and an eosinophilic colitis rate of 2.2 per 100,000, said Dr. Mansoor, a gastroenterologist at University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center.
The prevalence of celiac disease among patients with eosinophilic gastroenteritis or colitis was higher than in the eosinophilic esophagitis patients, with rates of 3.5% and 3.7%, respectively, that translated into odds ratios about 16-fold higher than the prevalence rates in the general population for both of these eosionophilic disorders.
The analyses reported by Dr. Mansoor also showed that the prevalence of celiac disease among patients with eosinophilic esophagitis was nearly twice as high in children (not more than 18 years old) as in adults and 50% higher in women than in men. These age and sex differences were both statistically significant.
Dr. Mansoor had no disclosures.
mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
ORLANDO – Patients with eosinophilic esophagitis had a ninefold increased prevalence of celiac disease, compared with the general public, in a review of more than 35 million U.S. residents.
This finding, which corresponded to a 2% overall prevalence rate of celiac disease in patients diagnosed with eosinophilic esophagitis, suggests that routine screening for celiac disease in eosinophilic esophagitis patients is warranted, Emad Mansoor, MD, said at the World Congress of Gastroenterology at ACG 2017.
This high prevalence level “has great implications for how we screen, treat, and manage” patients with either disorder, Dr. Mansoor said in a video interview. He hypothesized that celiac disease and eosinophilic esophagitis could share genetic etiologies or environmental or autoimmune triggers that produce the high level of overlap that the results showed.
The same analysis also found high rates of celiac disease in patients with either eosinophilic gastroenteritis or colitis, but because these are both much less prevalent than eosiniphillic esophagitis the absolute number of patients with either of these eosinophilic disorders who also had celiac disease was much lower.
It’s very possible that the prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis among patients with celiac disease is also significantly elevated, compared with the general population, but he and his associates have not run this analysis.
Their study included diagnostic records for 35,795,250 people in the Explorys database during May 2012 to May 2017, with entries from 317,000 providers at 360 U.S. hospitals. The review identified 84,040 patients with a diagnosis of celiac disease, 15,360 with eosinophilic esophagitis, 1,440 with eosinophilic gastritis, and 800 with eosinophilic colitis. This worked out to a 5-year prevalence rate of 234.8 cases of celiac disease per 100,000 patients (0.235%), an eosinophilic esophagitis prevalence of 43.7 per 100,000, an eosinophilic gastroenteritis rate of 4.0 per 100,000, and an eosinophilic colitis rate of 2.2 per 100,000, said Dr. Mansoor, a gastroenterologist at University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center.
The prevalence of celiac disease among patients with eosinophilic gastroenteritis or colitis was higher than in the eosinophilic esophagitis patients, with rates of 3.5% and 3.7%, respectively, that translated into odds ratios about 16-fold higher than the prevalence rates in the general population for both of these eosionophilic disorders.
The analyses reported by Dr. Mansoor also showed that the prevalence of celiac disease among patients with eosinophilic esophagitis was nearly twice as high in children (not more than 18 years old) as in adults and 50% higher in women than in men. These age and sex differences were both statistically significant.
Dr. Mansoor had no disclosures.
mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
AT THE WORLD CONGRESS OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Among patients with eosinophilic esophagitis, the celiac disease prevalence was ninefold higher than in the general population.
Data source: Review of more than 35 million U.S. patients during 2012-2017.
Disclosures: Dr. Mansoor had no disclosures.
Near-fatal asthma treated effectively by ECMO
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an effective way to treat near fatal asthma, but physicians must remember the risk of complications, according to an abstract on a study scheduled to be presented at CHEST 2017.
The study covers a retrospective analysis of 371 children with asthma who were treated with ECMO; it used data collected by the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry from 1988 to 2016. The median age of the children in the study was 7.5 years; the participant group was 43% white and 39% black, as well as 56% male, according to the abstract, which is mentioned in the program for the CHEST annual meeting.
About 80% of children experienced at least one complication, with 20% experiencing three or more. Children who had three or more complications were significantly less likely to experience lung recovery.
Of the children who received VV cannulation, 90% experienced lung recovery, whereas only 69% of children who received VA cannulation recovered. (P less than .0001). VA cannulation was also associated with a higher risk of neurological complications, while those who received VV cannulation were significantly more likely to survive.
The abstract is scheduled to be presented on Sunday Oct. 29 from 2:30 p.m. to 2:45 p.m. in Room 603 of Toronto Convention Centre South Building as part of the Acute Lung Injury & Respiratory Failure session, which will run from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m.
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an effective way to treat near fatal asthma, but physicians must remember the risk of complications, according to an abstract on a study scheduled to be presented at CHEST 2017.
The study covers a retrospective analysis of 371 children with asthma who were treated with ECMO; it used data collected by the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry from 1988 to 2016. The median age of the children in the study was 7.5 years; the participant group was 43% white and 39% black, as well as 56% male, according to the abstract, which is mentioned in the program for the CHEST annual meeting.
About 80% of children experienced at least one complication, with 20% experiencing three or more. Children who had three or more complications were significantly less likely to experience lung recovery.
Of the children who received VV cannulation, 90% experienced lung recovery, whereas only 69% of children who received VA cannulation recovered. (P less than .0001). VA cannulation was also associated with a higher risk of neurological complications, while those who received VV cannulation were significantly more likely to survive.
The abstract is scheduled to be presented on Sunday Oct. 29 from 2:30 p.m. to 2:45 p.m. in Room 603 of Toronto Convention Centre South Building as part of the Acute Lung Injury & Respiratory Failure session, which will run from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m.
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an effective way to treat near fatal asthma, but physicians must remember the risk of complications, according to an abstract on a study scheduled to be presented at CHEST 2017.
The study covers a retrospective analysis of 371 children with asthma who were treated with ECMO; it used data collected by the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry from 1988 to 2016. The median age of the children in the study was 7.5 years; the participant group was 43% white and 39% black, as well as 56% male, according to the abstract, which is mentioned in the program for the CHEST annual meeting.
About 80% of children experienced at least one complication, with 20% experiencing three or more. Children who had three or more complications were significantly less likely to experience lung recovery.
Of the children who received VV cannulation, 90% experienced lung recovery, whereas only 69% of children who received VA cannulation recovered. (P less than .0001). VA cannulation was also associated with a higher risk of neurological complications, while those who received VV cannulation were significantly more likely to survive.
The abstract is scheduled to be presented on Sunday Oct. 29 from 2:30 p.m. to 2:45 p.m. in Room 603 of Toronto Convention Centre South Building as part of the Acute Lung Injury & Respiratory Failure session, which will run from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m.
Reminder spurs flu vaccination of chronic disease patients
and because their parents are unaware influenza is risky for their children, reported Gilat Livni, MD, and Alina Wainstein, MD, of Tel Aviv University and their associates.
The investigators surveyed 186 parents of children attending a cardiology institute in Israel regarding flu vaccination. Over a third (37%) of the children had received a flu vaccine during the last flu season. Those who had been vaccinated were significantly more likely to have parents and siblings who were vaccinated (P less than .01).The mean age of the children was 8 years.
The main underlying cardiac diseases in the 186 children were left-to-right shunt defect in 31%, obstructive lesions in 30%, and cyanotic defect in 16%. Other cardiac abnormalities included valvular insufficiency in 11%, cardiomyopathy in 8%, and complete atrioventricular block in 4%.
More than half of parents (59%) reported that a pediatrician had recommended that their child get a flu vaccine; of these parents, 53% complied. Only 13% of parents who did not get such a recommendation had their children vaccinated – a statistically significant difference. Findings were similar regarding recommendations from pediatric cardiologists. “The failure of parents to receive information or advice from a physician regarding vaccination was strongly inversely related to vaccination of the child,” the investigators concluded.
“Our results emphasize the need to raise awareness among physicians and other medical health care personnel dealing with children with heart disease of the importance of properly counseling parents regarding influenza vaccination. Recommending the vaccine should be made part of routine patient visits in fall and winter,” concluded Dr. Livni, Dr. Wainstein, and associates.
The full text is available online (Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2017 Nov;36[11]: e268-71. doi: 10.1097/INF.0000000000001579).
and because their parents are unaware influenza is risky for their children, reported Gilat Livni, MD, and Alina Wainstein, MD, of Tel Aviv University and their associates.
The investigators surveyed 186 parents of children attending a cardiology institute in Israel regarding flu vaccination. Over a third (37%) of the children had received a flu vaccine during the last flu season. Those who had been vaccinated were significantly more likely to have parents and siblings who were vaccinated (P less than .01).The mean age of the children was 8 years.
The main underlying cardiac diseases in the 186 children were left-to-right shunt defect in 31%, obstructive lesions in 30%, and cyanotic defect in 16%. Other cardiac abnormalities included valvular insufficiency in 11%, cardiomyopathy in 8%, and complete atrioventricular block in 4%.
More than half of parents (59%) reported that a pediatrician had recommended that their child get a flu vaccine; of these parents, 53% complied. Only 13% of parents who did not get such a recommendation had their children vaccinated – a statistically significant difference. Findings were similar regarding recommendations from pediatric cardiologists. “The failure of parents to receive information or advice from a physician regarding vaccination was strongly inversely related to vaccination of the child,” the investigators concluded.
“Our results emphasize the need to raise awareness among physicians and other medical health care personnel dealing with children with heart disease of the importance of properly counseling parents regarding influenza vaccination. Recommending the vaccine should be made part of routine patient visits in fall and winter,” concluded Dr. Livni, Dr. Wainstein, and associates.
The full text is available online (Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2017 Nov;36[11]: e268-71. doi: 10.1097/INF.0000000000001579).
and because their parents are unaware influenza is risky for their children, reported Gilat Livni, MD, and Alina Wainstein, MD, of Tel Aviv University and their associates.
The investigators surveyed 186 parents of children attending a cardiology institute in Israel regarding flu vaccination. Over a third (37%) of the children had received a flu vaccine during the last flu season. Those who had been vaccinated were significantly more likely to have parents and siblings who were vaccinated (P less than .01).The mean age of the children was 8 years.
The main underlying cardiac diseases in the 186 children were left-to-right shunt defect in 31%, obstructive lesions in 30%, and cyanotic defect in 16%. Other cardiac abnormalities included valvular insufficiency in 11%, cardiomyopathy in 8%, and complete atrioventricular block in 4%.
More than half of parents (59%) reported that a pediatrician had recommended that their child get a flu vaccine; of these parents, 53% complied. Only 13% of parents who did not get such a recommendation had their children vaccinated – a statistically significant difference. Findings were similar regarding recommendations from pediatric cardiologists. “The failure of parents to receive information or advice from a physician regarding vaccination was strongly inversely related to vaccination of the child,” the investigators concluded.
“Our results emphasize the need to raise awareness among physicians and other medical health care personnel dealing with children with heart disease of the importance of properly counseling parents regarding influenza vaccination. Recommending the vaccine should be made part of routine patient visits in fall and winter,” concluded Dr. Livni, Dr. Wainstein, and associates.
The full text is available online (Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2017 Nov;36[11]: e268-71. doi: 10.1097/INF.0000000000001579).
FROM THE PEDIATRIC INFECTIOUS DISEASE JOURNAL
CDC: Zika-exposed newborns need intensified eye, hearing, and neurological testing
Infants with possible prenatal Zika exposure who test positive for the virus should receive an in-depth ophthalmologic exam, intensified hearing testing, and a thorough neurological evaluation with brain imaging within 1 month of birth, according to new interim guidance set forth by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The new clinical management guidelines, published in the Oct. 20 issue of the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, supersede the most recent CDC guidance, issued in August 2016. The agency deemed the update necessary after a recent convocation sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The meeting drew dozens of practicing clinicians and federal agency representatives, who reviewed the ever-evolving body of knowledge on how to best manage the care of these infants. Since Zika emerged as a public health threat, clinicians have reported postnatal onset of some symptoms, including eye abnormalities, a developing microcephaly in infants with a normal head circumference at birth, EEG abnormalities, and diaphragmatic paralysis.
The guidance focuses on three groups: infants with clinical findings of Zika syndrome born to mothers with possible Zika exposure during pregnancy; infants without clinical findings of Zika syndrome whose mothers had lab-confirmed Zika exposure; and infants without symptoms whose mothers might have been exposed, but who did not have laboratory-confirmed infection (MMWR. 2017 Oct 20;66[41]:1089-120).
Infants with clinical findings consistent with Zika syndrome and mothers with possible prenatal Zika exposure
These infants should be tested for Zika virus with serum and urine tests. If those are negative and there is no other apparent cause of the symptoms, they should have a cerebrospinal fluid sample tested for Zika RNA and IgM Zika antibodies.
By 1 month, these infants need a head ultrasound and a detailed ophthalmologic exam. The eye exam should pick up any anomalies of the anterior and posterior eye, including microphthalmia, coloboma, intraocular calcifications, optic nerve hypoplasia and atrophy, and macular scarring with focal pigmentary retinal mottling.
A comprehensive neurological exam also is part of the recommendation. Seizures are sometimes part of Zika syndrome, but infants can also have subclinical EEG abnormalities. Advanced neuroimaging can identify both obvious and subtle brain abnormalities: cortical thinning, corpus callosum abnormalities, calcifications at the white/gray matter junction, and ventricular enlargement are possible findings.
As infants grow, clinicians should be alert for signs of increased intracranial pressure that could signal postnatal hydrocephalus. Diaphragmatic paralysis also has been seen; this manifests by respiratory distress. Dysphagia that interferes with feeding can develop as well.
The complicated clinical picture calls for a team approach, Dr. Adebanjo said. “The follow-up care of [these infants] requires a multidisciplinary team and an established medical home to facilitate the coordination of care and ensure that abnormal findings are addressed.”
Infants without clinical findings, whose mothers have lab-confirmed Zika exposure
Initially, these infants should have the same early head ultrasound, hearing, and eye exams as those who display clinical findings. All of these infants also should be tested for Zika virus in the same way as those with clinical findings.
If tests return a positive result, they should have all the investigations and follow-ups recommended for babies with clinical findings. If lab testing is negative, and clinical findings are normal, Zika infection is highly unlikely and they can receive routine care, although clinicians and parents should be on the lookout for any new symptoms that might suggest postnatal Zika syndrome.
Infants without clinical findings, whose mothers had possible, but unconfirmed, Zika exposure
This is a varied and large group, which includes women who were never tested during pregnancy, as well as those who could have had a false negative test. “Because the latter issue is not easily discerned, all mothers with possible exposure to Zika virus infection, including those who tested negative with currently available technology, should be considered in this group,” Dr. Adebanjo said.
CDC does not recommend further Zika evaluation for these infants unless additional testing confirms maternal infection. For older infants, parents and clinicians should decide together whether any further evaluations would be helpful. But, Dr. Adebanjo said, “If findings consistent with congenital Zika syndrome are identified at any time, referrals to appropriate specialties should be made, and subsequent evaluation should follow recommendations for infants with clinical findings consistent with congenital Zika.”
CDC also reiterated its special recommendations for infants who had a prenatal diagnosis of Zika infection. For now, these remain unchanged from 2016, although “as more data become available, understanding of the diagnostic role of prenatal ultrasound and amniocentesis will improve and guidance will be updated.”
No one has yet identified the optimal timing for a Zika diagnostic ultrasound. CDC recommends serial ultrasounds be done every 3-4 weeks for women with lab-confirmed prenatal Zika exposure. Women with possible exposure need only routine ultrasound screenings.
While Zika RNA has been identified in amniotic fluid, there is no consensus on the value of amniocentesis as a prenatal diagnostic tool. Investigations of serial amniocentesis suggests that viral shedding into the amniotic fluid might be transient. If the procedure is done for other reasons, Zika nucleic acid testing can be incorporated.
A shared decision-making process is key when making screening decisions that should be individually weighed, Dr. Adebanjo said. “For example, serial ultrasounds might be inconvenient, unpleasant, and expensive, and might prompt unnecessary interventions; amniocentesis carries additional known risks such as fetal loss. These potential harms of prenatal screening for congenital Zika syndrome might outweigh the clinical benefits for some patients. Therefore, these decisions should be individualized.”
Neither Dr. Adebanjo nor any of the coauthors had any financial disclosures.
Infants with possible prenatal Zika exposure who test positive for the virus should receive an in-depth ophthalmologic exam, intensified hearing testing, and a thorough neurological evaluation with brain imaging within 1 month of birth, according to new interim guidance set forth by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The new clinical management guidelines, published in the Oct. 20 issue of the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, supersede the most recent CDC guidance, issued in August 2016. The agency deemed the update necessary after a recent convocation sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The meeting drew dozens of practicing clinicians and federal agency representatives, who reviewed the ever-evolving body of knowledge on how to best manage the care of these infants. Since Zika emerged as a public health threat, clinicians have reported postnatal onset of some symptoms, including eye abnormalities, a developing microcephaly in infants with a normal head circumference at birth, EEG abnormalities, and diaphragmatic paralysis.
The guidance focuses on three groups: infants with clinical findings of Zika syndrome born to mothers with possible Zika exposure during pregnancy; infants without clinical findings of Zika syndrome whose mothers had lab-confirmed Zika exposure; and infants without symptoms whose mothers might have been exposed, but who did not have laboratory-confirmed infection (MMWR. 2017 Oct 20;66[41]:1089-120).
Infants with clinical findings consistent with Zika syndrome and mothers with possible prenatal Zika exposure
These infants should be tested for Zika virus with serum and urine tests. If those are negative and there is no other apparent cause of the symptoms, they should have a cerebrospinal fluid sample tested for Zika RNA and IgM Zika antibodies.
By 1 month, these infants need a head ultrasound and a detailed ophthalmologic exam. The eye exam should pick up any anomalies of the anterior and posterior eye, including microphthalmia, coloboma, intraocular calcifications, optic nerve hypoplasia and atrophy, and macular scarring with focal pigmentary retinal mottling.
A comprehensive neurological exam also is part of the recommendation. Seizures are sometimes part of Zika syndrome, but infants can also have subclinical EEG abnormalities. Advanced neuroimaging can identify both obvious and subtle brain abnormalities: cortical thinning, corpus callosum abnormalities, calcifications at the white/gray matter junction, and ventricular enlargement are possible findings.
As infants grow, clinicians should be alert for signs of increased intracranial pressure that could signal postnatal hydrocephalus. Diaphragmatic paralysis also has been seen; this manifests by respiratory distress. Dysphagia that interferes with feeding can develop as well.
The complicated clinical picture calls for a team approach, Dr. Adebanjo said. “The follow-up care of [these infants] requires a multidisciplinary team and an established medical home to facilitate the coordination of care and ensure that abnormal findings are addressed.”
Infants without clinical findings, whose mothers have lab-confirmed Zika exposure
Initially, these infants should have the same early head ultrasound, hearing, and eye exams as those who display clinical findings. All of these infants also should be tested for Zika virus in the same way as those with clinical findings.
If tests return a positive result, they should have all the investigations and follow-ups recommended for babies with clinical findings. If lab testing is negative, and clinical findings are normal, Zika infection is highly unlikely and they can receive routine care, although clinicians and parents should be on the lookout for any new symptoms that might suggest postnatal Zika syndrome.
Infants without clinical findings, whose mothers had possible, but unconfirmed, Zika exposure
This is a varied and large group, which includes women who were never tested during pregnancy, as well as those who could have had a false negative test. “Because the latter issue is not easily discerned, all mothers with possible exposure to Zika virus infection, including those who tested negative with currently available technology, should be considered in this group,” Dr. Adebanjo said.
CDC does not recommend further Zika evaluation for these infants unless additional testing confirms maternal infection. For older infants, parents and clinicians should decide together whether any further evaluations would be helpful. But, Dr. Adebanjo said, “If findings consistent with congenital Zika syndrome are identified at any time, referrals to appropriate specialties should be made, and subsequent evaluation should follow recommendations for infants with clinical findings consistent with congenital Zika.”
CDC also reiterated its special recommendations for infants who had a prenatal diagnosis of Zika infection. For now, these remain unchanged from 2016, although “as more data become available, understanding of the diagnostic role of prenatal ultrasound and amniocentesis will improve and guidance will be updated.”
No one has yet identified the optimal timing for a Zika diagnostic ultrasound. CDC recommends serial ultrasounds be done every 3-4 weeks for women with lab-confirmed prenatal Zika exposure. Women with possible exposure need only routine ultrasound screenings.
While Zika RNA has been identified in amniotic fluid, there is no consensus on the value of amniocentesis as a prenatal diagnostic tool. Investigations of serial amniocentesis suggests that viral shedding into the amniotic fluid might be transient. If the procedure is done for other reasons, Zika nucleic acid testing can be incorporated.
A shared decision-making process is key when making screening decisions that should be individually weighed, Dr. Adebanjo said. “For example, serial ultrasounds might be inconvenient, unpleasant, and expensive, and might prompt unnecessary interventions; amniocentesis carries additional known risks such as fetal loss. These potential harms of prenatal screening for congenital Zika syndrome might outweigh the clinical benefits for some patients. Therefore, these decisions should be individualized.”
Neither Dr. Adebanjo nor any of the coauthors had any financial disclosures.
Infants with possible prenatal Zika exposure who test positive for the virus should receive an in-depth ophthalmologic exam, intensified hearing testing, and a thorough neurological evaluation with brain imaging within 1 month of birth, according to new interim guidance set forth by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The new clinical management guidelines, published in the Oct. 20 issue of the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, supersede the most recent CDC guidance, issued in August 2016. The agency deemed the update necessary after a recent convocation sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The meeting drew dozens of practicing clinicians and federal agency representatives, who reviewed the ever-evolving body of knowledge on how to best manage the care of these infants. Since Zika emerged as a public health threat, clinicians have reported postnatal onset of some symptoms, including eye abnormalities, a developing microcephaly in infants with a normal head circumference at birth, EEG abnormalities, and diaphragmatic paralysis.
The guidance focuses on three groups: infants with clinical findings of Zika syndrome born to mothers with possible Zika exposure during pregnancy; infants without clinical findings of Zika syndrome whose mothers had lab-confirmed Zika exposure; and infants without symptoms whose mothers might have been exposed, but who did not have laboratory-confirmed infection (MMWR. 2017 Oct 20;66[41]:1089-120).
Infants with clinical findings consistent with Zika syndrome and mothers with possible prenatal Zika exposure
These infants should be tested for Zika virus with serum and urine tests. If those are negative and there is no other apparent cause of the symptoms, they should have a cerebrospinal fluid sample tested for Zika RNA and IgM Zika antibodies.
By 1 month, these infants need a head ultrasound and a detailed ophthalmologic exam. The eye exam should pick up any anomalies of the anterior and posterior eye, including microphthalmia, coloboma, intraocular calcifications, optic nerve hypoplasia and atrophy, and macular scarring with focal pigmentary retinal mottling.
A comprehensive neurological exam also is part of the recommendation. Seizures are sometimes part of Zika syndrome, but infants can also have subclinical EEG abnormalities. Advanced neuroimaging can identify both obvious and subtle brain abnormalities: cortical thinning, corpus callosum abnormalities, calcifications at the white/gray matter junction, and ventricular enlargement are possible findings.
As infants grow, clinicians should be alert for signs of increased intracranial pressure that could signal postnatal hydrocephalus. Diaphragmatic paralysis also has been seen; this manifests by respiratory distress. Dysphagia that interferes with feeding can develop as well.
The complicated clinical picture calls for a team approach, Dr. Adebanjo said. “The follow-up care of [these infants] requires a multidisciplinary team and an established medical home to facilitate the coordination of care and ensure that abnormal findings are addressed.”
Infants without clinical findings, whose mothers have lab-confirmed Zika exposure
Initially, these infants should have the same early head ultrasound, hearing, and eye exams as those who display clinical findings. All of these infants also should be tested for Zika virus in the same way as those with clinical findings.
If tests return a positive result, they should have all the investigations and follow-ups recommended for babies with clinical findings. If lab testing is negative, and clinical findings are normal, Zika infection is highly unlikely and they can receive routine care, although clinicians and parents should be on the lookout for any new symptoms that might suggest postnatal Zika syndrome.
Infants without clinical findings, whose mothers had possible, but unconfirmed, Zika exposure
This is a varied and large group, which includes women who were never tested during pregnancy, as well as those who could have had a false negative test. “Because the latter issue is not easily discerned, all mothers with possible exposure to Zika virus infection, including those who tested negative with currently available technology, should be considered in this group,” Dr. Adebanjo said.
CDC does not recommend further Zika evaluation for these infants unless additional testing confirms maternal infection. For older infants, parents and clinicians should decide together whether any further evaluations would be helpful. But, Dr. Adebanjo said, “If findings consistent with congenital Zika syndrome are identified at any time, referrals to appropriate specialties should be made, and subsequent evaluation should follow recommendations for infants with clinical findings consistent with congenital Zika.”
CDC also reiterated its special recommendations for infants who had a prenatal diagnosis of Zika infection. For now, these remain unchanged from 2016, although “as more data become available, understanding of the diagnostic role of prenatal ultrasound and amniocentesis will improve and guidance will be updated.”
No one has yet identified the optimal timing for a Zika diagnostic ultrasound. CDC recommends serial ultrasounds be done every 3-4 weeks for women with lab-confirmed prenatal Zika exposure. Women with possible exposure need only routine ultrasound screenings.
While Zika RNA has been identified in amniotic fluid, there is no consensus on the value of amniocentesis as a prenatal diagnostic tool. Investigations of serial amniocentesis suggests that viral shedding into the amniotic fluid might be transient. If the procedure is done for other reasons, Zika nucleic acid testing can be incorporated.
A shared decision-making process is key when making screening decisions that should be individually weighed, Dr. Adebanjo said. “For example, serial ultrasounds might be inconvenient, unpleasant, and expensive, and might prompt unnecessary interventions; amniocentesis carries additional known risks such as fetal loss. These potential harms of prenatal screening for congenital Zika syndrome might outweigh the clinical benefits for some patients. Therefore, these decisions should be individualized.”
Neither Dr. Adebanjo nor any of the coauthors had any financial disclosures.
FROM MMWR
Pediatric hospitalists take on the challenge of antibiotic stewardship
When Carol Glaser, MD, was in training, the philosophy around antibiotic prescribing often went something like this: “Ten days of antibiotics is good, but let’s do a few more days just to be sure,” she said.
Today, however, the new mantra is “less is more.” Dr. Glaser is an experienced pediatric infectious disease physician and the lead physician for pediatric antimicrobial stewardship at The Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Permanente, at the Oakland (Calif.) Medical Center. While antibiotic stewardship is an issue relevant to nearly all hospitalists, for pediatric patients, the considerations can be unique and particularly serious.
Dr. Shah, a pediatric infectious disease physician at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, spoke last spring at HM17, the Society of Hospital Medicine’s annual meeting. His talk drew from issues raised on pediatric hospital medicine electronic mailing lists and from audience questions. These centered on decisions regarding the use of intravenous versus oral antibiotics for pediatric patients – or what he refers to as intravenous-to-oral conversion – as well as antibiotic treatment duration.
“For many conditions in pediatrics, we used to treat with intravenous antibiotics initially – and sometimes for the entire course – and now we’re using oral antibiotics for the entire course,” Dr. Shah said. He noted that urinary tract infections were once treated with IV antibiotics in the hospital but are now routinely treated orally in an outpatient setting.
Dr. Shah cited two studies, both of which he coauthored as part of the Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings Network, which compared intravenous versus oral antibiotics treatments given after discharge: The first, published in JAMA Pediatrics in 2014, examined treatment for osteomyelitis, while the second, which focused on complicated pneumonia, was published in Pediatrics in 2016.1,2
Both were observational, retrospective studies involving more than 2,000 children across more than 30 hospitals. The JAMA Pediatrics study found that roughly half of the patients were discharged with a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line, and half were prescribed oral antibiotics. In some hospitals, 100% of patients were sent home with a PICC line, and in others, all children were sent home on oral antibiotics. Although treatment failure rates were the same for both groups, 15% of the patients sent home with a PICC line had to return to the emergency department because of PICC-related complications. Some were hospitalized.1
The Pediatrics study found less variation in PICC versus oral antibiotic use across hospitals for patients with complicated pneumonia, but the treatment failure rate was slightly higher for PICC patients at 3.2%, compared with 2.6% for those on oral antibiotics. This difference, however, was not statistically significant. PICC-related complications were observed in 7.1% of patients with PICC lines also were more likely to experience adverse drug reactions, compared with patients on oral antibiotics.2
“PICC lines have some advantages, particularly when children are unable or unwilling to take oral antibiotics, but they also have risks” said Dr. Shah. “If outcomes are equivalent, why would you subject patients to the risks of a catheter? And, every time they get a fever at home with a PICC line, they need urgent evaluation for the possibility of a catheter-associated bacterial infection. There is an emotional cost, as well, to taking care of catheters in the home setting.”
Additionally, economic pressures are compelling hospitals to reduce costs and resource utilization while maintaining or improving the quality of care, Dr. Shah pointed out. “Hospitalists do many things well, and quality improvement is one of those areas. That approach really aligns with antimicrobial stewardship, and there is greater incentive with episode-based payment models and financial penalties for excess readmissions. Reducing post-discharge IV antibiotic use aligns with stewardship goals and reduces the likelihood of hospital readmissions.”
The hospital medicine division at Dr. Shah’s hospital helped assemble a multidisciplinary team involving emergency physicians, pharmacists, nursing staff, hospitalists, and infectious disease physicians to encourage the use of appropriate, narrow-spectrum antibiotics and reduce the duration of antibiotic therapies. For example, skin and soft-tissue infections that were once treated for 10-14 days are now sufficiently treated in 5-7days. These efforts to improve outcomes through better adherence to evidence-based practices, including better stewardship, earned the team the SHM Teamwork in Quality Improvement Award in 2014.
“Quality improvement is really about changing the system, and hospitalists, who excel in QI, are poised to help drive antimicrobial stewardship efforts,” Dr. Shah said.
At Oakland Medical Center, Dr. Glaser helped implement handshake rounds, an idea they adopted from a group in Colorado. Every day, with every patient, the antimicrobial stewardship team meets with representatives of the teams – pediatric intensive care, the wards, the NICU, and others – to review antibiotic treatment plans for the choice of antimicrobial drug, for the duration of treatment, and for specific conditions. “We work really closely with hospitalists and our strong pediatric pharmacy team every day to ask: ‘Do we have the right dose? Do we really need to use this antibiotic?’ ” Dr. Glaser said.
Last year, she also worked to incorporate antimicrobial stewardship principles into the hospital’s residency program. “I think the most important thing we’re doing is changing the culture,” she said. “For these young physicians, we’re giving them the knowledge to empower them rather than telling them what to do and giving them a better, fundamental understanding of infectious disease.”
For instance, most pediatric respiratory illnesses are caused by a virus, yet physicians will still prescribe antibiotics for a host of reasons – including the expectations of parents, the guesswork that can go into diagnosing a young patient who cannot describe what is wrong, and the fear that children will get sicker if an antibiotic is not started early.
“A lot of it is figuring out the best approach with the least amount of side effects but covering what we need to cover for a given patient,” she said.
A number of physicians from Dr. Glaser’s team presented stewardship data from their hospital at the July 2017 Pediatric Hospital Medicine meeting in Nashville, demonstrating that, overall, they are using fewer antibiotics and that fewer of those used are broad spectrum. This satisfies the “pillars of stewardship,” Dr. Glaser said. Use antibiotics only when you need them, use them only as long as you need, and then make sure you use the most narrow-spectrum antibiotic you possibly can, she said.
Oakland Medical Center has benefited from a strong commitment to antimicrobial stewardship efforts, Dr. Glaser said, noting that many programs may lack such support, a problem that can be one of the biggest hurdles antimicrobial stewardship efforts face. The support at her hospital “has been an immense help in getting our program to where it is today.”
References
1. Keren R, Shah SS, Srivastava R, et al. Comparative effectiveness of intravenous vs oral antibiotics for postdischarge treatment of acute osteomyelitis in children. JAMA Pediatr. 2015 Feb:169(2):120-8.
2. Shah SS, Srivastava R, Wu S, et al. Intravenous versus oral antibiotics for postdischarge treatment of complicated pneumonia. Pediatrics. 2016 Dec;138(6). pii: e20161692.
When Carol Glaser, MD, was in training, the philosophy around antibiotic prescribing often went something like this: “Ten days of antibiotics is good, but let’s do a few more days just to be sure,” she said.
Today, however, the new mantra is “less is more.” Dr. Glaser is an experienced pediatric infectious disease physician and the lead physician for pediatric antimicrobial stewardship at The Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Permanente, at the Oakland (Calif.) Medical Center. While antibiotic stewardship is an issue relevant to nearly all hospitalists, for pediatric patients, the considerations can be unique and particularly serious.
Dr. Shah, a pediatric infectious disease physician at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, spoke last spring at HM17, the Society of Hospital Medicine’s annual meeting. His talk drew from issues raised on pediatric hospital medicine electronic mailing lists and from audience questions. These centered on decisions regarding the use of intravenous versus oral antibiotics for pediatric patients – or what he refers to as intravenous-to-oral conversion – as well as antibiotic treatment duration.
“For many conditions in pediatrics, we used to treat with intravenous antibiotics initially – and sometimes for the entire course – and now we’re using oral antibiotics for the entire course,” Dr. Shah said. He noted that urinary tract infections were once treated with IV antibiotics in the hospital but are now routinely treated orally in an outpatient setting.
Dr. Shah cited two studies, both of which he coauthored as part of the Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings Network, which compared intravenous versus oral antibiotics treatments given after discharge: The first, published in JAMA Pediatrics in 2014, examined treatment for osteomyelitis, while the second, which focused on complicated pneumonia, was published in Pediatrics in 2016.1,2
Both were observational, retrospective studies involving more than 2,000 children across more than 30 hospitals. The JAMA Pediatrics study found that roughly half of the patients were discharged with a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line, and half were prescribed oral antibiotics. In some hospitals, 100% of patients were sent home with a PICC line, and in others, all children were sent home on oral antibiotics. Although treatment failure rates were the same for both groups, 15% of the patients sent home with a PICC line had to return to the emergency department because of PICC-related complications. Some were hospitalized.1
The Pediatrics study found less variation in PICC versus oral antibiotic use across hospitals for patients with complicated pneumonia, but the treatment failure rate was slightly higher for PICC patients at 3.2%, compared with 2.6% for those on oral antibiotics. This difference, however, was not statistically significant. PICC-related complications were observed in 7.1% of patients with PICC lines also were more likely to experience adverse drug reactions, compared with patients on oral antibiotics.2
“PICC lines have some advantages, particularly when children are unable or unwilling to take oral antibiotics, but they also have risks” said Dr. Shah. “If outcomes are equivalent, why would you subject patients to the risks of a catheter? And, every time they get a fever at home with a PICC line, they need urgent evaluation for the possibility of a catheter-associated bacterial infection. There is an emotional cost, as well, to taking care of catheters in the home setting.”
Additionally, economic pressures are compelling hospitals to reduce costs and resource utilization while maintaining or improving the quality of care, Dr. Shah pointed out. “Hospitalists do many things well, and quality improvement is one of those areas. That approach really aligns with antimicrobial stewardship, and there is greater incentive with episode-based payment models and financial penalties for excess readmissions. Reducing post-discharge IV antibiotic use aligns with stewardship goals and reduces the likelihood of hospital readmissions.”
The hospital medicine division at Dr. Shah’s hospital helped assemble a multidisciplinary team involving emergency physicians, pharmacists, nursing staff, hospitalists, and infectious disease physicians to encourage the use of appropriate, narrow-spectrum antibiotics and reduce the duration of antibiotic therapies. For example, skin and soft-tissue infections that were once treated for 10-14 days are now sufficiently treated in 5-7days. These efforts to improve outcomes through better adherence to evidence-based practices, including better stewardship, earned the team the SHM Teamwork in Quality Improvement Award in 2014.
“Quality improvement is really about changing the system, and hospitalists, who excel in QI, are poised to help drive antimicrobial stewardship efforts,” Dr. Shah said.
At Oakland Medical Center, Dr. Glaser helped implement handshake rounds, an idea they adopted from a group in Colorado. Every day, with every patient, the antimicrobial stewardship team meets with representatives of the teams – pediatric intensive care, the wards, the NICU, and others – to review antibiotic treatment plans for the choice of antimicrobial drug, for the duration of treatment, and for specific conditions. “We work really closely with hospitalists and our strong pediatric pharmacy team every day to ask: ‘Do we have the right dose? Do we really need to use this antibiotic?’ ” Dr. Glaser said.
Last year, she also worked to incorporate antimicrobial stewardship principles into the hospital’s residency program. “I think the most important thing we’re doing is changing the culture,” she said. “For these young physicians, we’re giving them the knowledge to empower them rather than telling them what to do and giving them a better, fundamental understanding of infectious disease.”
For instance, most pediatric respiratory illnesses are caused by a virus, yet physicians will still prescribe antibiotics for a host of reasons – including the expectations of parents, the guesswork that can go into diagnosing a young patient who cannot describe what is wrong, and the fear that children will get sicker if an antibiotic is not started early.
“A lot of it is figuring out the best approach with the least amount of side effects but covering what we need to cover for a given patient,” she said.
A number of physicians from Dr. Glaser’s team presented stewardship data from their hospital at the July 2017 Pediatric Hospital Medicine meeting in Nashville, demonstrating that, overall, they are using fewer antibiotics and that fewer of those used are broad spectrum. This satisfies the “pillars of stewardship,” Dr. Glaser said. Use antibiotics only when you need them, use them only as long as you need, and then make sure you use the most narrow-spectrum antibiotic you possibly can, she said.
Oakland Medical Center has benefited from a strong commitment to antimicrobial stewardship efforts, Dr. Glaser said, noting that many programs may lack such support, a problem that can be one of the biggest hurdles antimicrobial stewardship efforts face. The support at her hospital “has been an immense help in getting our program to where it is today.”
References
1. Keren R, Shah SS, Srivastava R, et al. Comparative effectiveness of intravenous vs oral antibiotics for postdischarge treatment of acute osteomyelitis in children. JAMA Pediatr. 2015 Feb:169(2):120-8.
2. Shah SS, Srivastava R, Wu S, et al. Intravenous versus oral antibiotics for postdischarge treatment of complicated pneumonia. Pediatrics. 2016 Dec;138(6). pii: e20161692.
When Carol Glaser, MD, was in training, the philosophy around antibiotic prescribing often went something like this: “Ten days of antibiotics is good, but let’s do a few more days just to be sure,” she said.
Today, however, the new mantra is “less is more.” Dr. Glaser is an experienced pediatric infectious disease physician and the lead physician for pediatric antimicrobial stewardship at The Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Permanente, at the Oakland (Calif.) Medical Center. While antibiotic stewardship is an issue relevant to nearly all hospitalists, for pediatric patients, the considerations can be unique and particularly serious.
Dr. Shah, a pediatric infectious disease physician at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, spoke last spring at HM17, the Society of Hospital Medicine’s annual meeting. His talk drew from issues raised on pediatric hospital medicine electronic mailing lists and from audience questions. These centered on decisions regarding the use of intravenous versus oral antibiotics for pediatric patients – or what he refers to as intravenous-to-oral conversion – as well as antibiotic treatment duration.
“For many conditions in pediatrics, we used to treat with intravenous antibiotics initially – and sometimes for the entire course – and now we’re using oral antibiotics for the entire course,” Dr. Shah said. He noted that urinary tract infections were once treated with IV antibiotics in the hospital but are now routinely treated orally in an outpatient setting.
Dr. Shah cited two studies, both of which he coauthored as part of the Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings Network, which compared intravenous versus oral antibiotics treatments given after discharge: The first, published in JAMA Pediatrics in 2014, examined treatment for osteomyelitis, while the second, which focused on complicated pneumonia, was published in Pediatrics in 2016.1,2
Both were observational, retrospective studies involving more than 2,000 children across more than 30 hospitals. The JAMA Pediatrics study found that roughly half of the patients were discharged with a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line, and half were prescribed oral antibiotics. In some hospitals, 100% of patients were sent home with a PICC line, and in others, all children were sent home on oral antibiotics. Although treatment failure rates were the same for both groups, 15% of the patients sent home with a PICC line had to return to the emergency department because of PICC-related complications. Some were hospitalized.1
The Pediatrics study found less variation in PICC versus oral antibiotic use across hospitals for patients with complicated pneumonia, but the treatment failure rate was slightly higher for PICC patients at 3.2%, compared with 2.6% for those on oral antibiotics. This difference, however, was not statistically significant. PICC-related complications were observed in 7.1% of patients with PICC lines also were more likely to experience adverse drug reactions, compared with patients on oral antibiotics.2
“PICC lines have some advantages, particularly when children are unable or unwilling to take oral antibiotics, but they also have risks” said Dr. Shah. “If outcomes are equivalent, why would you subject patients to the risks of a catheter? And, every time they get a fever at home with a PICC line, they need urgent evaluation for the possibility of a catheter-associated bacterial infection. There is an emotional cost, as well, to taking care of catheters in the home setting.”
Additionally, economic pressures are compelling hospitals to reduce costs and resource utilization while maintaining or improving the quality of care, Dr. Shah pointed out. “Hospitalists do many things well, and quality improvement is one of those areas. That approach really aligns with antimicrobial stewardship, and there is greater incentive with episode-based payment models and financial penalties for excess readmissions. Reducing post-discharge IV antibiotic use aligns with stewardship goals and reduces the likelihood of hospital readmissions.”
The hospital medicine division at Dr. Shah’s hospital helped assemble a multidisciplinary team involving emergency physicians, pharmacists, nursing staff, hospitalists, and infectious disease physicians to encourage the use of appropriate, narrow-spectrum antibiotics and reduce the duration of antibiotic therapies. For example, skin and soft-tissue infections that were once treated for 10-14 days are now sufficiently treated in 5-7days. These efforts to improve outcomes through better adherence to evidence-based practices, including better stewardship, earned the team the SHM Teamwork in Quality Improvement Award in 2014.
“Quality improvement is really about changing the system, and hospitalists, who excel in QI, are poised to help drive antimicrobial stewardship efforts,” Dr. Shah said.
At Oakland Medical Center, Dr. Glaser helped implement handshake rounds, an idea they adopted from a group in Colorado. Every day, with every patient, the antimicrobial stewardship team meets with representatives of the teams – pediatric intensive care, the wards, the NICU, and others – to review antibiotic treatment plans for the choice of antimicrobial drug, for the duration of treatment, and for specific conditions. “We work really closely with hospitalists and our strong pediatric pharmacy team every day to ask: ‘Do we have the right dose? Do we really need to use this antibiotic?’ ” Dr. Glaser said.
Last year, she also worked to incorporate antimicrobial stewardship principles into the hospital’s residency program. “I think the most important thing we’re doing is changing the culture,” she said. “For these young physicians, we’re giving them the knowledge to empower them rather than telling them what to do and giving them a better, fundamental understanding of infectious disease.”
For instance, most pediatric respiratory illnesses are caused by a virus, yet physicians will still prescribe antibiotics for a host of reasons – including the expectations of parents, the guesswork that can go into diagnosing a young patient who cannot describe what is wrong, and the fear that children will get sicker if an antibiotic is not started early.
“A lot of it is figuring out the best approach with the least amount of side effects but covering what we need to cover for a given patient,” she said.
A number of physicians from Dr. Glaser’s team presented stewardship data from their hospital at the July 2017 Pediatric Hospital Medicine meeting in Nashville, demonstrating that, overall, they are using fewer antibiotics and that fewer of those used are broad spectrum. This satisfies the “pillars of stewardship,” Dr. Glaser said. Use antibiotics only when you need them, use them only as long as you need, and then make sure you use the most narrow-spectrum antibiotic you possibly can, she said.
Oakland Medical Center has benefited from a strong commitment to antimicrobial stewardship efforts, Dr. Glaser said, noting that many programs may lack such support, a problem that can be one of the biggest hurdles antimicrobial stewardship efforts face. The support at her hospital “has been an immense help in getting our program to where it is today.”
References
1. Keren R, Shah SS, Srivastava R, et al. Comparative effectiveness of intravenous vs oral antibiotics for postdischarge treatment of acute osteomyelitis in children. JAMA Pediatr. 2015 Feb:169(2):120-8.
2. Shah SS, Srivastava R, Wu S, et al. Intravenous versus oral antibiotics for postdischarge treatment of complicated pneumonia. Pediatrics. 2016 Dec;138(6). pii: e20161692.