Clinical Case Summary

Whipple’s disease (WD), caused by Tropheryma whipplei, is a rare, multisystemic infection with a wide spectrum of clinical presentations. It may manifest acutely with nonspecific symptoms such as diarrhea, abdominal pain, fever, and fatigue, or present chronically. Diagnosis can be challenging due to its diverse manifestations, including cardiac, pulmonary, and neurological involvement. We describe a case of a 54-year-old male with a background of peroneal nerve dysfunction, admitted for progressive epigastric pain, nausea, vomiting, altered bowel habits, and recent mood changes. A comprehensive diagnostic evaluation was undertaken, including blood tests, abdominal ultrasound, computed tomography, and upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with biopsy. Diagnostic investigations revealed elevated cholestatic and pancreatic enzymes, raised CRP and ferritin levels, esophagitis, and distal duodenal swelling obstructing endoscope passage with inflammation around the ampulla of Vater. There were features of chronic pancreatitis with calcifications, pseudocysts (up to 27 mm), dilated Wirsung’s duct, and enlarged crescent lymph nodes. Histopathology showed extensive macrophage infiltration, and PAS staining was suggestive of T. whipplei infection. The patient was successfully treated with Ceftriaxone 2g orally daily for 30 days, followed by Trimethoprim/Sulfamethoxazole 960mg twice daily for one year. This case highlights an atypical presentation of WD, manifesting as upper gastrointestinal obstruction and recurrent acute pancreatitis, probably due to duodenal and ampullary inflammation impairing bile flow. It underscores the importance of considering WD in the differential diagnosis of complex and unexplained gastrointestinal symptoms. Presentations involving upper gastrointestinal obstruction and pancreatitis are rare. Early identification through intestinal biopsy and appropriate antimicrobial therapy is critical to avoid irreversible complications and improve outcomes.

References

Illustrative material:
1. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: view of the descending duodenum
2. Abdominal CT scan
3. Pathological findings: PAS staining

Introduction

Non-invasive biomarkers are needed to improve the management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We investigated whether eosinophil and lymphocyte counts could be used to diagnose EoE among patients with dysphagia and assess histological, endoscopic, and clinical disease activity in patients with known EoE.

Aims & Methods

This was a prospective study conducted at four EoE referral centers (Pisa, Padova, Humanitas Research Hospital, Milano Policlinico San Donato). We enrolled consecutive patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for suspected or known EoE who had performed blood counts within one month before EGD. Histological remission and non-EoE-related dysphagia (NED) were defined according to current guidelines on EoE. Endoscopic characteristics were classified according to the EoE reference score (EREFS). Demographic, clinical and full blood count data were collected. After the EGD, all patients completed the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire over 14 days (DSQ). Kruskal-Wallis Rank Sum Test and Pearson’s Chi-squared were used for comparisons. ROC curve analysis was used to assess the diagnostic accuracy. Spearman’s test was used for correlations. Significance threshold was p<0.05.

Results

We included 210 consecutive patients. Of these, 123 had EoE (58.5% active; 41.5% in histological remission) while 87 had non-EoE dysphagia (NED). Characteristics in Table 1. Absolute eosinophil count (AEC) of active EoE was significantly higher than NED (335 vs 90/mm3; p<0.001), and so was eosinophil percentage (4.6% vs 1.1%; p<0.001), and median lymphocyte percentage (30 vs 27%; p<0.001). ROC curve analysis showed that a cut-off of 155 eosinophils/mm3 had an AUC of 0.85, with 71% specificity and 87% sensitivity for the identification of EoE among patients with dysphagia (Figure 1a). Other ROC analyses on the diagnosis of EoE reported in Table 2. With regards to disease monitoring, only eosinophil counts differed significantly between EoE and NED. Median AEC of active EoE was higher than EoE in remission (335 vs 200/mm3; p<0.01), and so was eosinophil percentage (4.6 vs 1.4%; p<0.001) (Table 3). Based on ROC analysis, a cut-off of 325 eosinophils/mm3 had and AUC of 0.70 for the identification of histological remission in EoE, with a specificity of 52.7%% and sensitivity of 82.3% (Figure 1b) (Table 3). There was modest positive correlation between AEC and the EREFS with Spearman’s Rho of 0.4 (p<0.0001), but there was no correlation between AEC and DSQ scores (Rho= -0.01; p=0.9).

Conclusion

Our results show that the AEC in peripheral blood has good accuracy for the diagnosis of EoE in patients with dysphagia and moderate accuracy for monitoring histological disease activity. In addition, AEC was modestly correlated with endoscopic disease activity (EREFS score) but not with symptoms.

Disclosure

Speaker or Consultancy for Apogee Therapeutics, Dr Falk Pharma, Malesci, JB Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Alfasigma

Introduction

Chronic liver disease remains one of the most common causes for hospital admission and is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Timely and adequate management within the first 24 hours is crucial for improving clinical outcomes in cases of decompensated cirrhosis. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of implementing a care bundle checklist during the first 24 hours of hospital admission on management and outcomes of decompensated cirrhosis.

Aims & Methods

We developed an adapted care bundle (based on the BSG/BASL care bundle, AASLD quality measures proposal, Baveno VII consensus, and EASL guidelines) and compared two patient groups from two Portuguese hospital centers: Group-A (retrospective, pre-care bundle implementation) and Group-B (prospective, post-care bundle implementation).

Results

A total of 224 patients (Group-A: 148; Group-B: 76) were included. More than one decompensation was observed in 118 patients (52.7%), and 69 patients (30.8%) were experiencing their index hospitalization for liver decompensation. Regarding etiology, alcoholic liver disease was the most common (n=200; 89.3%). The groups were similar in terms of gender, age, length of hospital stay, and Child-Pugh and MELD-Na scores at admission. The most common decompensations were gastrointestinal bleeding (n=91; 40.6%), ascites (n=75; 33.5%), and hepatic encephalopathy (n=72; 32.1%). Group B was more likely to present with multiple decompensations at admission and exhibited significantly higher rates of acute kidney injury, hepatocellular carcinoma, acute-on-chronic liver failure, and portal vein thrombosis (p<0.05). Following care bundle implementation, we found significant improvements in patient care. At admission, patients were significantly more likely to undergo urine and blood cultures, chest X-ray, and abdominal ultrasound (p<0.05), receive diagnostic paracentesis (p<0.05), and have an accurate alcohol history documented (p=0.04). During admission, Group-B was significantly more likely to be prescribed lactulose for encephalopathy prophylaxis, vasopressor therapy for gastrointestinal bleeding, and venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, as well as undergo nutritional assessment (p<0.05). While in-hospital mortality rates were similar (4.7% vs. 5.3%; p=1), 6-week mortality rates (8.8% vs. 3.9%; p=0.01) and 3-month readmission rates (31.1% vs. 15.8%; p=0.02) were significantly lower in the post-intervention cohort.

Conclusion

The implementation of a standardized care bundle was associated with higher rates of appropriate investigation and treatment within the first 24 hours of hospital admission and improved patient outcomes, reducing 6-week mortality and 3-month readmission rates.