METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: An observational study was conducted on 63 post-bariatric surgery patients who had undergone bariatric surgery between two weeks and five years after surgery. The participants were assessed for the complications experienced, current comorbidities, anthropometric changes, dietary intake, and psychological well-being. A three-day, 24-hour diet recall was done to assess the dietary intake of the patients. The mean macronutrient and micronutrient intakes were compared to several available recommendations. The DASS-21 questionnaire was administered to determine the psychological well-being of the participants.
RESULTS: The most common complications experienced by patients after bariatric surgery were hair loss (50.8%), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (49.2%), and vomiting (41.3%). There were significant differences in mean weight before (129.5 (33.0) kg/m2) and after (85.0 (32.0) kg/m2) bariatric surgery (p<0.001). The prevalence of clinically severe obesity declined by 55%. Overall, patients had insufficient intake of some nutrients such as protein, fat, calcium, and iron. Majority of the patients experienced a normal level of stress, anxiety, and depression, but some had mild (3.2%), moderate (4.8%), and severe anxiety (1.6%).
CONCLUSIONS: There were drastic improvements in patients' weight following bariatric surgery. However, there were several complications including nutrient deficiencies. Due to the anatomical changes in the gastrointestinal tract, patients must comply with the dietary and lifestyle changes and follow up with the healthcare professional. A nutrition module will be helpful for patients to prepare for and adapt to the changes after bariatric surgery.
METHODS: Stool samples were collected prospectively from symptomatic adults who had elective colonoscopy from September 2014 to January 2016 and were analyzed with the ScheBo M2-PK Quick test and laboratory detection of fecal hemoglobin.
RESULTS: The results were correlated to the colonoscopy findings and/or histopathology report. Eighty-five subjects (age of 56.8 ± 15.3 years [mean ± standard deviation]) were recruited with a total of 17 colorectal cancer (20.0%) and 10 colorectal adenoma patients (11.8%). The sensitivity of M2-PK test in colorectal cancer detection was higher than gFOBT (100% vs. 64.7%). M2-PK test had a lower specificity when compared to gFOBT (72.5% vs. 88.2%) in colorectal cancer detection. The positive and negative predictive values were 47.2% and 100% for M2-PK test and 57.9% and 90.9% for gFOBT.
CONCLUSION: Fecal M2-PK Quick test has a high sensitivity for detection of colorectal cancer when compared to gFOBT, making it the potential choice for colorectal tumor screening biomarker in the future.
Methods: Data of patients with renal hyperparathyroidism who underwent total parathyroidectomy between January 2007 to December 2014 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into 2 cohort groups according to their serum calcium levels within 24 hours of parathyroidectomy: the hypocalcemia group (calcium levels of 2 mmol/L or less), and the normocalcemia group (calcium levels more than 2 mmol/L). With the use of multivariable logistic regression analyses, the predictors of early postoperative hypocalcemia after total parathyroidectomy in patients with renal hyperparathyroidism were investigated.
Results: Among 68 patients, 56 patients (82.4%) were symptomatic preoperatively. Fifty patients (73.5%) presented with bone pain and 14 patients (20.6%) had muscle weakness. Early postoperative hypocalcemia occurred in 25 patients (36.8%). Preoperative alkaline phosphatase level was the predictor of early postoperative hypocalcemia (adjusted odds ratio, 1.004; 95% confidence interval, 1.001-1.006; P = 0.002).
Conclusion: Results from our study show that most of the patients with renal hyperparathyroidism were symptomatic preoperatively and the most common clinical presentations were bone pain and muscle weakness. The significant predictor of early postoperative hypocalcemia after total parathyroidectomy was the preoperative alkaline phosphatase levels.
METHODS: Using a prospective randomised controlled single-blinded study design, 164 patients scheduled for colonoscopy were allocated to two groups (n = 82 patients in each) to receive either the conventional PEG volume (3 L, control group) or the low volume (2 L, intervention group). The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), a validated scale for assessing bowel cleanliness during colonoscopy, was used to score bowel cleanliness in three colon segments. Secondarily, colonoscopy completeness, tolerability to drinking PEG and the duration of colonoscopy were compared between the groups.
RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the two intervention groups in terms of bowel cleanliness (P = 0.119), colonoscopy completion (P = 0.535), tolerability (P = 0.190) or the amount of sedation/analgesia required (midazolam, P = 0.162; pethidine, P = 0.708). Only the duration of colonoscopy differed between the two groups (longer duration in the control group, P = 0.039).
CONCLUSION: Low-volume (2 L) PEG is as effective as the standard 3 L solution in bowel cleaning before colonoscopy; however, the superiority of either solution could not be established.