Search

BACKGROUND: The Hill classification characterizes the geometry of gastroesophageal junction and Hill grades (HGs) III and IV have a high association with pathologic reflux. This study aimed to understand the use of the Hill classification and correlate the prevalence of pathologic reflux across different HGs. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of 477 patients who underwent upper endoscopy and BRAVO pH monitoring between August 2018 and October 2021 was performed. These charts were reviewed for endoscopic findings for hiatal hernia and association of HGs with pathologic reflux, defined as an abnormal esophageal acid exposure time (AET) of =4.9%. RESULTS: Of 477 patients, 252 (52.8%) had an HG documented on the endoscopy report. Of the 252 patients, 61 had HG I (24.2%), 100 had HG II (39.7%), 61 had HG III (24.2%), and 30 had HG IV (11.9%). The proportion of patients with abnormal AET increases with increasing HGs (p < 0.001) as follows: I (39.3%), II (52.5%), III (67.2%), and IV (79.3%). The mean overall AET is as follows: HG I (5.5 ± 6%), HG II (7.0 ± 5.9%), HG III (10.2 ± 10.3%), and HG IV (9.5 ± 5.5%). The proportion of patients with hiatal hernia was 18% for HG I, 28% for HG II, 39.3% for HG III, and 80% for HG IV. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the Hill classification in clinical practice is low. There is an association of increasing HGs with increasing proportion of patients with abnormal AET. There is a high proportion of patients within HGs I and II with documented pathologic reflux and the presence of a hiatal hernia as observed on endoscopic examination. Our study suggests that endoscopic grading of the gastroesophageal junction may not adequately differentiate between normal vs abnormal reflux status, particularly for HGs I and II. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had wide-ranging effects on management of medical conditions. Many hospitals encountered staffing shortages, limited operating room availability, and shortage of hospital beds. There was increased psychological stress and fear of contracting COVID-19 infection, leading to delay in medical care for various disease processes. The objective of this study was to examine changes in management and outcomes attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic in patients presenting with acute calculus cholecystitis at US academic centers. STUDY DESIGN: Using the Vizient database, patients with the diagnosis of acute calculus cholecystitis who underwent intervention during the 15 months before the pandemic (prepandemic, October 2018 to December 2019) were compared with 15 months during the pandemic (pandemic, March 2020 to May 2021). Outcomes measures included demographics, characteristics, type of intervention, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and direct cost. RESULTS: There were 146,459 patients with acute calculus cholecystitis identified (prepandemic: 74,605 vs pandemic: 71,854). Patients in the pandemic group were more likely to undergo medical management (29.4% vs 31.8%; p < 0.001) or percutaneous cholecystostomy tube placement (21.5% vs 18%; p < 0.001) and less likely to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy (69.8% vs 73.0%; p < 0.001). Patients in the pandemic group who underwent procedural intervention had longer length of stay (6.5 days vs 5.9 days; p < 0.001), higher in-hospital death (3.1% vs 2.3%; p < 0.001), and higher cost ($14,609 vs $12,570; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of patients with acute calculus cholecystitis, there were distinct changes in the management and outcomes of patients due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Changes in the type of intervention and outcomes are likely related to delayed presentation with increases in the severity and complexity of the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]